Tesla braces for its first trial involving Autopilot fatality
Send a link to a friend
[August 28, 2023] By
Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Tesla Inc is set to defend itself for the
first time at trial against allegations that failure of its Autopilot
driver assistant feature led to death, in what will likely be a major
test of Chief Executive Elon Musk's assertions about the technology.
Self-driving capability is central to Tesla’s financial future,
according to Musk, whose own reputation as an engineering leader is
being challenged with allegations by plaintiffs in one of two lawsuits
that he personally leads the group behind technology that failed. Wins
by Tesla could raise confidence and sales for the software, which costs
up to $15,000 per vehicle.
Tesla faces two trials in quick succession, with more to follow.
The first, scheduled for mid-September in a California state court, is a
civil lawsuit containing allegations that the Autopilot system caused
owner Micah Lee’s Model 3 to suddenly veer off a highway east of Los
Angeles at 65 miles per hour, strike a palm tree and burst into flames,
all in the span of seconds.
The 2019 crash, which has not been previously reported, killed Lee and
seriously injured his two passengers, including a then-8-year old boy
who was disemboweled. The lawsuit, filed against Tesla by the passengers
and Lee's estate, accuses Tesla of knowing that Autopilot and other
safety systems were defective when it sold the car.
MUSK 'DE FACTO LEADER' OF AUTOPILOT TEAM
The second trial, set for early October in a Florida state court, arose
out of a 2019 crash north of Miami where owner Stephen Banner’s Model 3
drove under the trailer of an 18-wheeler big rig truck that had pulled
into the road, shearing off the Tesla's roof and killing Banner.
Autopilot failed to brake, steer or do anything to avoid the collision,
according to the lawsuit filed by Banner's wife.
Tesla denied liability for both accidents, blamed driver error and said
Autopilot is safe when monitored by humans. Tesla said in court
documents that drivers must pay attention to the road and keep their
hands on the steering wheel.
"There are no self-driving cars on the road today," the company said.
The civil proceedings will likely reveal new evidence about what Musk
and other company officials knew about Autopilot’s capabilities – and
any possible deficiencies. Banner’s attorneys, for instance, argue in a
pretrial court filing that internal emails show Musk is the Autopilot
team's "de facto leader".
Tesla and Musk did not respond to Reuters’ emailed questions for this
article, but Musk has made no secret of his involvement in self-driving
software engineering, often tweeting about his test-driving of a Tesla
equipped with "Full Self-Driving" software. He has for years promised
that Tesla would achieve self-driving capability only to miss his own
targets.
Tesla won a bellwether trial in Los Angeles in April with a strategy of
saying that it tells drivers that its technology requires human
monitoring, despite the "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving" names. The
case was about an accident where a Model S swerved into the curb and
injured its driver, and jurors told Reuters after the verdict that they
believed Tesla warned drivers about its system and driver distraction
was to blame.
STAKES HIGHER FOR TESLA
The stakes for Tesla are much higher in the September and October
trials, the first of a series related to Autopilot this year and next,
because people died.
[to top of second column] |
Tesla Model 3 vehicles are seen for sale
at a Tesla facility in Fremont, California, U.S., May 23, 2023.
REUTERS/Carlos Barria
"If Tesla backs up a lot of wins in these cases, I think they're
going to get more favorable settlements in other cases," said
Matthew Wansley, a former General Counsel of nuTonomy, an automated
driving startup and Associate Professor of Law at Cardozo School of
Law.
On the other hand, "a big loss for Tesla - especially with a big
damages award" could "dramatically shape the narrative going
forward," said Bryant Walker Smith, a law professor at the
University of South Carolina.
In court filings, the company has argued that Lee consumed alcohol
before getting behind the wheel and that it is not clear whether
Autopilot was on at the time of crash.
Jonathan Michaels, an attorney for the plaintiffs, declined to
comment on Tesla’s specific arguments, but said "we're fully aware
of Tesla's false claims including their shameful attempts to blame
the victims for their known defective autopilot system."
In the Florida case, Banner's attorneys also filed a motion arguing
punitive damages were warranted. The attorneys have deposed several
Tesla executives and received internal documents from the company
that they said show Musk and engineers were aware of, and did not
fix, shortcomings.
In one deposition, former executive Christopher Moore testified
there are limitations to Autopilot, saying it "is not designed to
detect every possible hazard or every possible obstacle or vehicle
that could be on the road," according to a transcript reviewed by
Reuters.
In 2016, a few months after a fatal accident where a Tesla crashed
into a semi-trailer truck, Musk told reporters that the automaker
was updating Autopilot with improved radar sensors that likely would
have prevented the fatality.
But Adam (Nicklas) Gustafsson, a Tesla Autopilot systems engineer
who investigated both accidents in Florida, said that in the almost
three years between that 2016 crash and Banner’s accident, no
changes were made to Autopilot’s systems to account for
cross-traffic, according to court documents submitted by plaintiff
lawyers.
The lawyers tried to blame the lack of change on Musk. "Elon Musk
has acknowledged problems with the Tesla autopilot system not
working properly," according to plaintiffs' documents. Former
Autopilot engineer Richard Baverstock, who was also deposed, stated
that "almost everything" he did at Tesla was done at the request of
"Elon," according to the documents.
Tesla filed an emergency motion in court late on Wednesday seeking
to keep deposition transcripts of its employees and other documents
secret. Banner’s attorney, Lake "Trey" Lytal III, said he would
oppose the motion.
"The great thing about our judicial system is Billion Dollar
Corporations can only keep secrets for so long," he wrote in a text
message.
(Reporting by Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin in San Francisco, Editing
by Peter Henderson and Grant McCool)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |