Jury orders Tesla to pay more than $240 million in Autopilot crash case
		
		[August 02, 2025]  By 
		BERNARD CONDON and DAVID FISCHER 
						
		MIAMI (AP) — A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk’s car company Tesla was 
		partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot 
		driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $240 million 
		in damages. 
		 
		The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because 
		its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a 
		reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his 
		cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The 
		decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe 
		enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi 
		service in several cities in the coming months. 
		 
		The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its 
		outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against 
		Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the 
		company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 
		 
		“This will open the floodgates,” said Miguel Custodio, a car crash 
		lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. “It will embolden a lot of people 
		to come to court.” 
		 
		The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of 
		the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured 
		boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key 
		evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. 
		Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly 
		hadn’t thought it was there. 
  
						
		
		  
						
		 
		“We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually 
		defective,” said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. “Justice was 
		achieved.” 
		 
		Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial 
		data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that 
		the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla 
		had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a 
		forensic data expert who dug it up. 
		 
		“Today’s verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, “and only works 
		to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla’s and the entire 
		industry’s efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,” They 
		said the plaintiffs concocted a story ”blaming the car when the driver – 
		from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.” 
		 
		In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla 
		must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory 
		damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 
		million. 
		 
		“It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the 
		industry,” said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. “It's 
		not a good day for Tesla.” 
		 
		Tesla said it will appeal. 
		 
		Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than 
		what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits 
		punitive damages to three times Tesla’s compensatory damages. 
		Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says 
		their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just 
		Tesla’s, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will 
		have to pay. 
		 
		It’s not clear how much of a hit to Tesla’s reputation for safety the 
		verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its 
		technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, 
		in 2019. 
		 
		
            [to top of second column]  | 
            
             
            
			  
            Neima Benavides, whose sister died in a Florida crash involving 
			Tesla’s Autopilot driver assist technology, speaks to reporters 
			outside the federal courthouse in Miami, Friday, Aug. 1, 2025. (AP 
			Photo/David Fischer) 
              But the issue of trust generally in 
			the company came up several times in the case, including in closing 
			arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs’ lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, 
			said Tesla’s decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was 
			willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives 
			because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a 
			car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. 
			 
			Schreiber said other automakers use terms like “driver assist” and 
			“copilot” to make sure drivers don’t rely too much on the 
			technology. 
			 
			“Words matter,” Schreiber said. “And if someone is playing fast and 
			lose with words, they’re playing fast and lose with information and 
			facts.” 
			 
			Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent 
			when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a 
			T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet 
			Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. 
			 
			The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 
			feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later 
			found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday 
			with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic 
			brain injury. 
			 
			But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla 
			allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot 
			as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing 
			them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed 
			for, like the one McGee was driving on. 
			 
			“I trusted the technology too much,” said McGee at one point in his 
			testimony. “I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, 
			it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.” 
			 
			The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered 
			that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road 
			and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he 
			looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. 
			Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 
			times previously and hadn’t crashed during any of those trips, Smith 
			said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: “The cause is that 
			he dropped his cellphone.” 
			 
			The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a 
			finding of Tesla liability despite a driver’s admission of reckless 
			behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as 
			they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves. 
			 
			__ 
			 
			Condon reported from New York. 
			
			
			All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved 
			
			   |