27-year-old driver killed after hitting semi-truck on I-77, troopers say
LINK: TRAFFIC MAPS
Jared Quincey Nelson, of Elkin, was driving a 2008 Mitsubishi Eclipse south when troopers said he didn't slow down before crashing into a semi-truck without a trailer. The semi-truck then hit a 2003 Chevy Tahoe.
Nelson died at the scene. The semi-truck driver had minor injuries, and the Tahoe driver was not hurt.
'Excessive speed to be the contributing factor in the collision,' troopers said.
The road was closed for about three hours, and there will be no charges.
VIDEO: Truck driver seriously injured in I-77 pile-up, faces long recovery
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
3 days ago
- Miami Herald
A Tesla killed a man in the Keys, and a Miami jury sent a $243 million message
On Aug. 1, 2025, a federal jury in Miami sent a resounding message — not only to Tesla, but to the entire automotive industry. In a landmark verdict, the jury awarded over $243 million in damages after finding Tesla partially liable for a 2019 crash in Key Largo that killed 22-year-old Naibel Benavides Leon and seriously injured her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, now 33, both of Miami-Dade. We are the attorneys who brought the case against Tesla on behalf of Angulo and the Benavides family. Our case showed that the Tesla Model S that hit our clients had detected the couple's parked Chevrolet Tahoe directly in its path on Card Sound Road, yet failed to brake or even warn its driver before striking the Tahoe at high speed. This Miami case marked the first time a federal jury weighed in on a fatal crash involving Autopilot and a third party. While the driver admitted fault, the jury determined that Tesla's system — and how it was marketed — shared responsibility. The outcome should represent a turning point in how we approach vehicle automation, corporate accountability and public safety. The verdict sends several clear messages to Tesla and the industry at large: Branding carries consequences: Tesla marketed its driver-assist system as 'Autopilot,' a term that implies self-sufficiency and full autonomy. That choice, and numerous other misrepresentations of the system's capabilities made by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, created a false sense of security for Tesla customers. The jury recognized that words matter when they lead to behavioral risk. Marketing should follow engineering reality — not ambition. Withholding critical data is not acceptable: Tesla initially claimed that no data from the crash had been preserved. But our experts recovered video and performance logs showing the vehicle registered impending danger and did nothing. Jurors saw this as clear and convincing evidence that the car was defective. Technology does not absolve manufacturers of responsibility: Tesla's defense hinged on the driver's admitted distraction and carelessness. But the jury still found Tesla responsible for not building adequate safeguards into its system. A responsible automaker anticipates foreseeable misuse, and acts expeditiously to counter widespread misuse when it leads to injuries and fatalities. Punitive damages reflect societal concern: The $200 million in punitive damages is a signal that jurors believe Tesla needs to change. This level of award reflects the view that the company's approach to safety and disclosure failed a basic moral standard. When jurors respond with this level of force, they're speaking for more than the courtroom. Regulators and competitors are watching: We suspect this verdict will ripple far beyond one case in Miami. It invites deeper scrutiny from federal safety regulators and may prompt competing automakers to rethink their own driver-assist strategies. Future lawsuits will take a harder look at automation: Until now, many Autopilot-related cases were settled quietly or dismissed. This federal verdict sets a powerful precedent: juries are willing to hold tech companies accountable for systems that overpromise and underperform. The public expects more than innovation — it demands safety: Flashy tech, futuristic promises and rapid releases have long defined Tesla's brand. But this case reminded everyone that innovation without responsibility is dangerous. Companies must be honest about their limitations. Tesla is expected to appeal. Regardless, the message is out: 'Autopilot' isn't just a brand — it's a duty. And when that duty is breached, the consequences are both human and financial. The pain of that night will never be undone. But this verdict offers a path toward safer roads, better regulation and smarter technology. It is not a finish line, but it is a turning point — one that demands the auto industry match its innovation with accountability. Todd Poses, Adam Boumel and Doug Eaton are Miami attorneys who brought the case against Tesla on behalf of Dillon Angulo and the Benavides family.
Motor 1
6 days ago
- Motor 1
‘Didn't Want to Give Me My Money Back:' Florida Woman Buys Chevy Tahoe for $9,800. Then 2 Mechanics Deem it ‘Undrivable'
A Florida woman says the 2008 Chevy Tahoe she purchased from a dealership for $9,800 turned into a nightmare less than an hour later. She felt like she was being scammed at the dealership, so she hired a lawyer. Now she thinks the lawyer is trying to double down on her bad luck. TikTok user Marie ( @therealmarieg ) posted a video about her situation on August. 1. In the video, she recounts how she purchased the vehicle and drove it off the lot—only to have buyer's remorse less than an hour later. 'A dealership scammed me and now the lawyer that I hired is trying to scam me,' she says to start the video. 'Let's talk about it.' Get the best news, reviews, columns, and more delivered straight to your inbox, daily. back Sign up For more information, read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use . What Marie Says Happened Marie explains that she purchased the Tahoe in November. After just 30 minutes of driving, a series of warning lights went on. She went back to the dealership to get her money back, but the dealership refused. Trending Now Woman Asks TikTok What's Wrong With Her Mini Cooper. Then a Mechanic in the Comments Figures It Out Just by Listening to a Sound 'I Just Bought It:' Woman Uses Groupon to Pay For Her Oil Change. Then the Mechanic Asks Her What Type of Car She Drives 'Fast forward, I paid $5,000 to an attorney, because the dealership didn't want to give me my money back or take the car back,' she says. 'And it was deemed undrivable by two mechanics. Now, the lawyer is asking me for $2,500, when I gave them $5,000 in December and all they've done is send two letters.' In the caption, she writes, 'First the dealership scammed me. Now the lawyer playing, too? At this point, I'm just collecting red flags like Pokémon cards.' Viewers React to the 'Scam' Story In the comments, users discussed scam culture in automobile sales. Others questioned the wisdom of paying more than half of what she paid on the car itself in lawyer fees. 'You paid $5k to a lawyer on a car worth $9k?' asked one user. 'I'm so sorry, but 'as is' means exactly that,' wrote a second person. 'The dealer could have helped you out, though they are not obligated to. The lawyer is the scammer. He should have looked at your paperwork and told you 'as is.' Talk to the dealer and see if they are willing to work something out like put you in another car.' A third person explained further. 'So the first problem is that, in Florida, 'as is' is how almost all used cars are sold,' they wrote. 'And it means exactly what it says. They have no responsibility to refund, repair, or give you anything back, unfortunately. Now, you have a compound problem because you are now out $14,800. Sorry that happened to you.' What Is Florida's 'As Is' Law? According to a local news investigation , the commenter is correct about Florida law. A significant proportion of used cars sold in Florida are labeled 'as is,' meaning that the dealer is not responsible for refunding or repairing cars it sells that break down—even if they break down a short period of time after the sale. A consumer attorney told News Channel 8 that there is often 'no recourse' for car buyers in this unfortunate situation. In some cases, hiring an attorney can backfire even worse than it did in Marie's situation. Others have been saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees after losing in court to the dealership. Motor1 reached out to Marie via TikTok comment and direct message for comment. We'll update this if she responds. More From Motor1 'I Only Go On Sundays:' Dealership Salesman Calls Out Customers for Saying 'I'm Just Looking' When He Approaches Them 'That's Definitely One Way to Do It:' Woman Says She Cried at the Mazda Dealership. Then They Gave Her the Price She Wanted 'I See a Lawsuit Coming With All That Evidence:' Woman Visits Nissan Dealership. It Doesn't Go Well 'Lawyer Up Immediately:' Woman Takes Her Car Into Dealership to Get it Detailed. Then the Dealership Sells It Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
Business Insider
01-08-2025
- Business Insider
Tesla found partly to blame in trial over deadly Autopilot crash
In a major blow to Tesla, a Florida federal jury on Friday found Elon Musk's electric car company partly to blame for a 2019 crash that left a 22-year-old woman dead and her boyfriend seriously injured. The jury sided with the plaintiffs, awarding the family of Naibel Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, a combined $329 million in total damages. The verdict marks a substantial setback for Tesla and its Autopilot driver-assistance feature that the attorneys for the plaintiffs said was engaged at the time of the deadly collision and had design flaws. It follows a three-week civil trial that included testimony from Angulo, Benavides Leon's family members, and the driver of the Tesla that plowed into a parked SUV and struck the couple as they were stargazing outside the vehicle alongside a Key Largo road. The case stems from a wrongful death lawsuit that the plaintiffs brought against Tesla. The lawsuit argued that the car maker's vehicles were "defective and unsafe for their intended use." Tesla, the lawsuit said, programmed Autopilot "to allow it to be used on roadways that Tesla knew were not suitable for its use and knew this would result in collisions causing injuries and deaths of innocent people who did not choose to be a part of Tesla's experiments, such as Plaintiffs." "Despite knowing of Autopilot's deficiencies, Tesla advertised Autopilot in a way that greatly exaggerated its capabilities and hid its deficiencies," said the lawsuit, which pointed to multiple comments from Musk touting the safety and reliability of the software. Tesla driver George McGee had Autopilot on when his 2019 Model S blew past a stop sign and a flashing red light at a three-way intersection and plowed into Angulo's mother's Chevrolet Tahoe at more than 60-miles-per-hour, the lawsuit said. McGee — who previously settled a separate lawsuit with the plaintiffs for an undisclosed amount — said he had dropped his cellphone during a call and bent down to pick it up moments before his Tesla, without warning, T-boned the Tahoe. He testified during the trial that he thought of Autopilot, which allows the vehicle to steer itself, switch lanes, brake, and accelerate on its own, a "copilot." "My concept was it would assist me should I have a failure" or "should I make a mistake," McGee said in testimony, adding, "I do feel like it failed me." "I believe it didn't warn me of the car and the individuals and nor did it apply brakes," McGee testified. Attorneys for Tesla have argued that McGee was solely responsible for the April 25, 2019, crash. In the trial's opening statements, Tesla attorney Joel Smith said the case was about a driver, not a "defective vehicle," and had "nothing to do with Autopilot." "It's about an aggressive driver, not a complacent driver, a distracted driver who was fumbling around for his cellphone," Smith said. "It's about a driver pressing an accelerator pedal and driving straight through an intersection." Tesla's attorneys said that just before the crash, McGee hit the accelerator, overriding the vehicle's set cruising speed of 45 miles per hour and its ability to brake on its own. Autopilot mode, Tesla says on its website, is "intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment."
