In what is expected to be a significant test of Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s claims about the technology, Tesla is ready to defend itself for the first time in court against allegations that the failure of its Autopilot driver assistance system resulted in fatality.
Musk, whose image as an engineering leader is being questioned by plaintiffs in one of two cases who claim that he directly oversees the group behind the technology that failed, claims that self-driving capabilities are essential to Tesla’s financial future. Tesla’s victories may increase trust and sales of the software, which may cost up to $15,000 per vehicle.
Tesla is currently facing two trials, with more to come.
In the first, a civil lawsuit alleging that the Autopilot system caused owner Micah Lee’s Model 3 to abruptly veer off a highway east of Los Angeles at 65 mph, strike a palm tree, and catch fire all within seconds, is set to be heard in a California state court in mid-September.
The 2019 collision, which has not previously been published, left two of Lee’s passengers critically hurt, including an 8-year-old boy who was disemboweled. The passengers and Lee’s estate accuse Tesla of knowing that Autopilot and other safety features were flawed when it sold the car in the lawsuit they filed against the automaker.
Musk is the team’s “de facto leader” in Autopilot
The second trial, scheduled to begin in early October in a Florida state court, resulted from a 2019 collision north of Miami in which owner Stephen Banner’s Model 3 drove beneath the trailer of an 18-wheeler big rig vehicle that had stopped into the road, tearing off the Tesla’s roof and killing Banner. According to the lawsuit brought by Banner’s wife, Autopilot did nothing to prevent the crash, including braking, steering, or any other action.
Tesla claimed driver error for both accidents, denied responsibility, and insisted that Autopilot is secure when controlled by people. According to Tesla, motorists must maintain their focus on the road and keep their hands firmly on the wheel.
The business stated, “Today, there are no self-driving automobiles on the road.
New information regarding what Musk and other business officials knew about Autopilot’s capabilities — and any potential flaws — will probably surface throughout the civil processes. For instance, the attorneys for Banner contend in a pre-trial court document that internal emails demonstrate Musk is the “de facto leader” of the Autopilot project.
Musk has made no secret of his involvement in the development of self-driving software, frequently tweeting about his test-driving of a Tesla with “Full Self-Driving” software. Tesla and Musk did not respond to Reuters’ emails for this report. Years of promises that Tesla will develop self-driving technology have fallen short of his own expectations.
Tesla claimed that, despite the labels “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving,” it notifies drivers that its technology needs human monitoring, and this argument helped the company win a bellwether trial in Los Angeles in April. Jurors told Reuters following the verdict that they thought Tesla notified drivers about its system & driver distraction was at fault for the accident in which a Model S drifted into the curb and wounded its driver.
Higher stakes for Tesla
Because people died in the first of a series of Autopilot experiments taking place this year and next, in September and October, the stakes for Tesla are significantly higher.
“If Tesla backs up plenty of wins in these cases, I think they’re going to get favorable settlements in other cases,” predicted Matthew Wansley, former general counsel of autonomous driving startup nuTonomy and an associate professor of law at Cardozo School of Law.
As opposed to this, “a big loss for Tesla — especially with a big damages award” might “dramatically shape the narrative going forward,” according to a law professor at the University of South Carolina, Bryant Walker Smith.
The firm has contended in court documents that Lee drank alcohol before driving and that it is unclear whether Autopilot was turned on at the time of the crash.
The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Jonathan Michaels, declined to respond to Tesla’s particular points, but he did say that “we’re fully aware of Tesla’s false claims, including their shameful efforts to blame the victims for their proven defective autopilot system.”
Attorneys for Banner also submitted a motion in the Florida case supporting the need for punitive damages. The lawyers claim that internal Tesla records and the depositions of multiple Tesla officials prove Musk and the engineers were aware of flaws but did not address them.
According to a transcript acquired by Reuters, former executive Christopher Moore said that Autopilot has limitations because it “is not designed to detect every possible hazard, every possible obstacle, or any vehicle that could be on the road.”
A few months following a tragic collision with a semi-trailer vehicle, Musk informed reporters in 2016 that Tesla was improving Autopilot with better radar sensors, which very likely would have prevented the fatalities.
But according to court documents provided by plaintiff attorneys, a Tesla Autopilot systems engineer, Adam (Nicklas) Gustafsson, who looked into both accidents in Florida, claimed that in the nearly three years between that 2016 crash and Banner’s accident, no adjustments were made to Autopilot’s systems to account for cross-traffic.
The attorneys attempted to pin Musk’s lack of progress on the situation. In the documents submitted by the plaintiffs, it is said that Elon Musk “has acknowledged issues with the Tesla autopilot system not functioning properly.” The records suggest that former Autopilot engineer Richard Baverstock, who was also deposed, claimed that “almost everything” he accomplished at Tesla was at “Elon’s” inclination.
Late on Wednesday, Tesla submitted an urgent plea to the court asking for the confidentiality of its employees’ deposition transcripts and other information. Lake “Trey” Lytal III, the lawyer for Banner, declared that he would fight the move.
He stated in a text message, “The nice thing about our court system is Billion Dollar Corporations can only retain secrets for so long.