Tesla ordered to pay $243 million over fatal Autopilot crash
The verdict is a rare win for victims of accidents involving Autopilot. Musk has been pushing to rapidly expand Tesla's recently launched robotaxi business based on an advanced version of its driver assistance software.
Tesla shares fell 1.8% on Friday, and are down 25% this year.
Jurors in Miami federal court awarded the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon, as well as her former boyfriend Dillon Angulo, $US129 million in compensatory damages plus $US200 million in punitive damages, according to a verdict sheet.
Tesla was held liable for 33% of the compensatory damages, or $US42.6 million.
Jurors found the driver George McGee liable for 67%, but he was not a defendant and will not have to pay his share.
"Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
"Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries," he added.
Tesla said it would appeal.
"Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," the company said.
The plaintiffs had sought $US345 million of damages. Their lawyers said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot.
IMPACT ON FUTURE CASES
Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without getting to trial.
In June, a judge rejected Tesla's bid to dismiss the Florida case. Experts said Friday's verdict may spur more lawsuits, and could make future settlements more costly.
"It's a big deal," said Alex Lemann, a law professor at Marquette University. "This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgment in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its Autopilot technology."
The verdict could also impede efforts by Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles as well as robotaxis it plans to start producing next year.
As Tesla's electric vehicle sales fall, much of its nearly $US1 trillion market value hinges on Musk's ability to pivot the company into robotics and artificial intelligence.
DRIVER'S ROLE
The trial concerned an April 25, 2019 incident in which George McGee drove his 2019 Model S at about 62mph (100kmh) through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder.
McGee had reached down to pick up a cellphone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV.
Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 23 metres to her death, while Angulo suffered serious injuries.
"We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash," said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology.
"The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software," he added. "That's a big deal."
Tesla, in its statement, said McGee was entirely at fault.
"To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash," the company said. "This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs' lawyers blaming the car when the driver - from day one - admitted and accepted responsibility."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
14 hours ago
- RNZ News
Musk quietly puts brakes on plans for new political party, WSJ says
Elon Musk. Photo: Beata Zawrzel / NurPhoto via AFP Billionaire Elon Musk is quietly putting the brakes on plans to start his new political party, telling allies he wants to focus on his companies, the Wall Street Journal has said, citing people with knowledge of the plans. Musk unveiled the 'America Party' in July after a public dispute with President Donald Trump on the tax cut and spending bill. He has recently been focused in part on maintaining ties with Vice President JD Vance, the paper said, and has acknowledged to associates that forming a political party would damage his relationship with Vance. Musk, the world's richest man, and his associates have told people close to Vance that the billionaire is considering using some of his financial resources to back Vance if he decides to run for president in 2028, the paper said. The CEO of Tesla and SpaceX spent nearly $300 million (NZ$514m) in 2024 to help Trump and other Republicans get elected, exerting enormous influence in the first few weeks of Trump's term as head of the newly created efficiency department (DOGE). Reuters could not immediately verify the Journal report. Tesla and the White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment outside regular business hours. Vance, who had called for a truce following Musk's all-public feud with Trump, reaffirmed his position this month and said he had asked Musk to return to the Republican fold. Tesla shares are down more than 18 percent this year after it posted in July its worst quarterly sales decline in more than a decade and profit that missed Wall Street targets, though its profit margin was better than many had feared. Musk also warned of "a few rough quarters" after the end of support for electric vehicles by the Trump administration. Investors worry whether he will be able to devote enough time and attention to Tesla after locking horns with Trump over his ambitions for a new political party. -Reuters Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Autocar
16 hours ago
- NZ Autocar
Tesla backtracks on stalkless cabins
Tesla is partially reversing one of its most controversial design decisions, reintroducing steering column stalks to the Model 3 – at least in China. The American EV maker removed indicator and gear selector stalks from the Model 3 in 2023, moving their functions onto the touchscreen and steering wheel controls. While the move was billed as part of Tesla's push toward simplicity, not all owners warmed to the change. Trying to use the indicators while also turning, as you would do when negotiating a round a bout, proved troublesome. Now, new Model 3s delivered in China will once again feature a turn signal stalk as standard. Existing owners will also be able to retrofit the part through Tesla Service Centres for a fee of 2,499 yuan (around NZ$350). Eligibility begins with cars built after 7 February 2025, with earlier vehicles to follow at a later date. Read more 2024 Tesla Model 3 RWD review For now, the retrofit is only confirmed for China, with no word on availability in the United States or other markets. Some aftermarket solutions already exist, ranging from stick-on units to fully integrated steering column conversions, catering to drivers who miss the convenience of a physical stalk. The debate isn't limited to the Model 3. Tesla's wider line-up has also been affected by the company's stalk-free approach, with none of its current US models featuring a traditional gear selector. The updated Model Y is the only Tesla sold globally with a turn signal stalk fitted as standard. This is not the first time Tesla has walked back a bold design experiment. In 2021, the refreshed Model S launched with a futuristic yoke steering wheel, with CEO Elon Musk insisting at the time it would be the default setup going forward. Just two years later, Tesla reinstated a conventional round wheel as standard, relegating the yoke to a NZ$1,600 option on the high-performance Model S Plaid and Model X Plaid. Tesla has long prided itself on challenging automotive conventions, but its latest U-turn highlights that not all drivers are ready to abandon tried-and-true ergonomics. After all, stalks have been around for decades for a reason: they're simple, safe, and they work.
1News
2 days ago
- 1News
Dissolving the nuclear taboo would benefit NZ hugely – but do we have the guts?
OPINION: The AI future will require unprecedented amounts of power, and embracing nuclear energy is an obvious, clean solution that could boost the NZ economy for generations. But do we have a leader with the courage? By Thomas Scrimgeour Artificial Intelligence is transforming our world, though not in the way most people imagine. While the knowledge industry revolution is still around the corner, the warehouse-sized computers driving this innovation can't be built fast enough. Data centres already consume roughly 2% of global electricity, which is more than 10 times New Zealand's annual generation, and this figure is projected to double by 2026. The COL4 AI-ready data centre, on a seven-acre campus, Columbus, Ohio. COL4 spans 256,000 square feet with 50 MW of power across three data halls. (Source: Getty) ADVERTISEMENT Elon Musk's xAI recently built the world's largest supercomputer, 'Colossus,' in 122 days. They then doubled its size in just 92. It now requires the power of a small city to operate, and xAI is turning to non-renewables to supply this insatiable need. Around the world, AI's energy demands are rising faster than clean energy capacity can keep up. In Northern Virginia, a major data centre hub, AI-driven power use is expected to triple by 2029, while clean energy capacity will only double. An opportunity for New Zealand This problem is our opportunity. Countries able to deliver clean, reliable, and affordable energy will be best placed to attract billions in data centre investment. The good news is that we already have a distinct competitive advantage. Nearly 90% of New Zealand's electricity generation is renewable, our temperate climate lowers cooling costs, and we're politically stable with strong privacy protections. The sales pitch writes itself. Global hyperscalers have already noticed. Microsoft has invested $1 billion in New Zealand data centres, and Amazon Web Services plans to spend $7.5 billion on their new data centre in northwest Auckland. But here's the hitch: we might have what the world wants, but we don't have enough of it. ADVERTISEMENT Manapōuri hydro power station (Source: Meridian) Hydroelectricity is great, but we're not about to dam another river. Wind and solar are neat, but in midwinter they contribute very little. When renewables fall short, coal and gas fire up, bringing last winter's power price headlines back to haunt us. We need more generation and innovation. The big four power companies, known as gentailers, both produce and sell electricity to consumers. They aren't investing enough in new generation and critics argue the market incentives aren't there to expand capacity. Paul Fuge from Consumer NZ site Powerswitch puts it bluntly: 'the results we're seeing aren't what you'd expect from a thriving competitive market.' Market reform could help. But the real opportunity lies in increasing power production. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including Zelensky's suit becomes hot topic at peace summit, a cold blast on the way, and Auckland FC lures new signing back home. (Source: 1News) Conventional geothermal is our best near-term lever. It already supplies nearly 20% of our electricity and operates 24/7, unlike weather-dependent renewable energy. The best estimates suggest that we have enough active geothermal zones to double our output. I believe supercritical geothermal is the natural next step. It involves drilling five kilometres into the Earth's crust to unlock ten times the power of conventional geothermal. However, supercritical geothermal still faces significant technological hurdles. Commercialisation isn't expected until the late 2030s, and it's unclear how quickly it could scale. ADVERTISEMENT So we need a second pillar of clean energy generation, which brings us to the last swear word in New Zealand politics. Nuclear. (I can already smell the uranium.) David Lange at the Oxford Union debate on nuclear weapons,1985, where the then prime minister quipped to his American opponent that he could 'smell the uranium' on his breath. (Source: TVNZ) Can we turn around the taboo? It's only a strange quirk of history that nuclear power is controversial in New Zealand. It got bundled together with the protest backlash of the 1980s, and we've never quite moved on. The 1978 New Zealand Royal Commission on Nuclear Power was expecting a 'significant nuclear power program in the early part of next century.' Better late than never, I suppose. Although traditional nuclear power is brilliant, high upfront costs and a long build time put it in the too-hard basket, especially given New Zealand's basic revulsion. But nuclear technology is rapidly evolving. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), one-tenth the size of conventional plants, are on the horizon and could be installed in a fraction of the time. A bold government could break the nuclear taboo in a single term. ADVERTISEMENT The Americans want SMRs by the end of the decade. One company, NuScale, already has regulatory approval. Canada will build four 300-megawatt reactors by the mid-2030s, and Japan is reversing plans to decommission its nuclear power plants. All we need is a leader with the courage to take the first step. A feasibility study to work out the who, when, and where of SMRs could be started today. The first politician to raise the issue will take some heat, but Kiwi voters will reward conviction and enjoy the benefits for generations. Energy abundance is the foundation of every productive economy, and the only road to lasting prosperity. We have the chance to do two big, good things: create a data centre industry for New Zealand and generate enough power to bring down costs for everyday Kiwis. But opportunities like this don't wait around. The time to act is now. Thomas Scrimgeour is a reasearcher at the Maxim Institute, an independent think tank based in Auckland.
