The company sought to overturn a $243 million award after a 22-year-old student stargazing was killed when a runaway Tesla with Autopilot features struck her. A jury found the speeding driver mostly at fault but also held Tesla responsible for faulty technology. Carmakers monitoring the outcome fear wide liability if juries assign blame to manufacturers despite reckless driver behavior. Tesla argued opposing lawyers misled the jury by introducing prejudicial, irrelevant evidence about allegedly hidden or lost video and data, which later helped reconstruct the moments before the crash. Tesla said it mistakenly failed to produce the evidence earlier and did not withhold it deliberately. Musk faced significant risk by taking the case to trial amid plans to expand self-driving robotaxis.
The filing in Miami federal court seeks to overturn the $243 million award after a 22-year old student out stargazing was flung through the air to her death by a runaway Tesla equipped with Autopilot features that Musk had talked up for years. A jury earlier this month found that the speeding Tesla driver was mostly to blame but Tesla was also responsible because of faulty technology. The case has been watched closely by carmakers racing to develop fully self-driving features.
They fear it could portend massive liability risks should future juries reviewing accidents decide carmakers are also to blame even when drivers act recklessly. If the verdict is allowed to stand, it will chill innovation, harm road safety and invite future juries to punish manufacturers who bring new safety features to market, the company said in the filing.
Tesla is also arguing that opposing lawyers led the jury astray by introducing highly prejudicial but irrelevant evidence suggesting Tesla had hid or lost video and data that, after it was dug up by the opposing side, helped recreate what went wrong moments before the crash. Tesla had said that it made a mistake in not offering up the evidence earlier and did not do that deliberately.
Collection
[
|
...
]