A California jury has found Tesla not responsible for a fatal accident in a case involving an alleged defect in the Tesla Model 3 "Autopilot" feature. Molander v. Tesla Inc. is one of the first jury trials to consider alleged defects in driver-assistance features involving a fatal accident.
The case arose out of a motor vehicle accident involving a 2019 Tesla Model 3. At the time of the accident, the driver was operating the vehicle at about 65 miles per hour on a California highway. The accident resulted from the vehicle turning off the highway and crashing into a tree, killing the driver and injuring the two passengers.
The vehicle was equipped with Tesla's "Autopilot" feature. "Autopilot" is a suite of advanced driver-assistance features. The features include "Traffic Aware Cruise Control", which matches vehicle speed to surrounding traffic, and "Autosteer", which assists in vehicle steering in marked lanes. Tesla states in the owner's manual that these features are intended for use with a fully attentive driver who has his or her hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any time.
In the "Autopilot" case, the plaintiffs alleged that the "Autopilot" feature caused the vehicle to veer sharply to the right — causing the wheel to turn 43 degrees — and prevented the driver from regaining control. The plaintiffs sought $400 million in damages against Tesla primarily for alleged negligent design and manufacture of the "Autopilot" feature.
Tesla denied the allegations, arguing at trial that the accident was caused by human error. Tesla submitted evidence that the driver had consumed alcohol prior to operating the vehicle, and argued that there was no evidence that the driver had even activated the "Autopilot" feature at the time of the accident.
After a nearly month-long trial, the 12-person jury deliberated for four days to answer the question: "Was there a manufacturing defect in the Autopilot system on [the driver's] 2019 Tesla Model 3?". The verdict is now in — the jury answered "no".
This trial was closely watched by auto industry observers. While the case was decided by a unique jury on its specific facts, it nonetheless is a welcome result for manufacturers using or planning to use self-driving features in their vehicles.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
