Tesla is firmly pushing back against a $243 million jury verdict tied to a 2019 fatal crash involving its Autopilot system. The company has enlisted a powerhouse legal team—including Theodore Boutrous Jr. and Miguel Estrada of Gibson Dunn, alongside former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement—to spearhead its appeal in a Miami federal court. Tesla argues the verdict lacks legal justification and is requesting either a dismissal or a new trial
Case Highlights
- The 2019 crash in Key Largo involved a Tesla Model S on Autopilot colliding with a stationary Chevrolet Tahoe, tragically resulting in one death and one serious injury.
- A jury awarded $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages—totaling roughly $242.6 million.
- Tesla refused a $60 million settlement earlier in the case.
- The company contends Florida law bars punitive damages in this case and calls into question the plaintiffs’ expert testimony.
- Tesla further argues that the jury was influenced improperly by statements about Elon Musk and irrelevant evidence, skewing the trial’s fairness.
- In a separate revelation, it emerged that Tesla’s internal collision data—once thought unavailable—had been recovered by a hacker, raising concerns over data practices and transparency.
Why It Matters for the Industry
This case is more than a verdict—it’s a critical moment for the regulation and legal accountability of autonomous vehicle technology. The outcome could influence how driver-assist systems are marketed, litigated, and legislated in the future.
Insight
Tesla’s decisive response—from assembling top-tier appellate talent to aggressively challenging the verdict—signals its intent to shape the legal landscape around autonomous driving. As the case progresses, attorneys and law firms must watch closely—not just for its implications on product liability, but also for evolving standards in technology law and consumer safety.
