A federal grand jury in early August found Tesla responsible for an April 25, 2019 crash in which a Model S crashed into a couple standing by their SUV as they watched the stars.
The incident occurred at the T-intersection of Card Sound Road and County Road 905 in Key Largo. The driver, identified as George McGee, crashed his Tesla vehicle into the couple’s SUV at 60 mph after he dropped his cellphone and believed the vehicle’s Autopilot feature would protect him if something was in front.
Naibel Benavides Leon was killed as a result of the crash. She was 22. Her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, was severely injured.
Action was brought against Tesla by the families in Miami-Dade Circuit Court in April 2021. A liability action lawsuit was filed in federal court in August 2022.
The case finally reached the jury in a Miami courtroom in late July. The plaintiffs’ attorney, Brett Schreiber, stated Tesla conducted a “misinformation campaign” that exaggerated how Tesla Autopilot works, causing drivers to become complacent.
Ultimately, the jury placed 33% blame on the failure of Tesla’s Autopilot driver assist technology and ordered the company to pay $200 million punitive damages and $42.5 million in compensatory damages. McGee, too, was found responsible. A separate case between the families and McGee was settled.
Tesla’s lawyers disagreed with the verdict by the jury, however, and are appealing after they said the Model S had no design defects and that it was the driver’s fault. The appeal was filed Aug. 29.
The case also brought explosive claims in court by lawyers for the family of the deceased woman, Benavides Leon, and Angulo that Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded just seconds before the accident. That was until a hacker managed to dig up the data Tesla said it didn’t have, according to a report by the Washington Post.
Per Tesla’s appeal, blame should be on the driver, and imposing liability on the technology, in this case the Autopilot feature, “will only deter innovation, confound consumer expectations, and lead manufacturers to abandon safety enhancements for fear of being subjected to large punishments when a driver misuses their product.”
