A California state court jury awarded Tesla Inc an overwhelming victory, finding that the automaker’s Autopilot feature failed to operate safely in what appears to be the first trial involving a crash involving the partially automated driving software .
The verdict could be a major win for Tesla as it tests and rolls out its Autopilot and more advanced “Full Self-Driving (FSD)” system, which Chief Executive Elon Musk has touted is critical to his company’s future but that has drawn regulatory and legal scrutiny.
Justine Hsu, a Los Angeles resident, sued the electric vehicle maker in 2020, saying her Tesla Model S drove into a curb while on autopilot and then deployed an airbag. caused nerve damage in her face.”
She claimed there were flaws in the Autopilot and airbag design, seeking more than $3 million in damages for the alleged flaws and other claims.
Tesla denied liability for the 2019 accident. A lawsuit stated that Hsu used Autopilot on city streets, despite warnings in Tesla’s owner’s manual to do so.
At a hearing in Los Angeles Superior Court on Friday, the jury awarded Hsu zero damages. It also found that the airbag did not fail to operate safely and that Tesla did not deliberately fail to disclose facts to it.
Hsu burst into tears outside the courtroom after the jury delivered its verdict.
One of Hsu’s lawyers, Donald Slavik, said they are disappointed with the outcome and appreciate the jury’s service. Tesla attorney Michael Carey declined to comment.
Tesla calls its driver-assistance system Autopilot, or FSD, but says the feature doesn’t make the cars autonomous and human drivers “must be prepared to take over at any time.”
The EV maker introduced Autopilot in 2015 and the first fatal accident in the United States was reported in 2016, but the case never went to trial.
Critical time for Tesla
The Hsu trial took place in Los Angeles Superior Court over the past three weeks and featured testimony from three Tesla engineers.
It came at a critical time for the company as it braces for a series of other trials starting this year on the semi-automatic driving system, which Musk claimed is safer than human drivers.
While the outcome of the trial is not legally binding in other cases, it is considered a test case because it would serve as a barometer to help Tesla and other plaintiffs’ attorneys hone their strategies, experts say.
Cassandra Burke Robertson, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law who has studied self-driving car liability, said early cases “give an indication of how later cases are likely to play out.”
Tesla is also under investigation by the US Department of Justice and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for their claims about self-driving capabilities and the safety of the technology, respectively.
The main question in Autopilot cases has been who is responsible for an accident while a car was in Driver Assist Autopilot mode: a human driver, the machine or both? Hsu’s lawsuit alleged that the Tesla vehicle hit the curb so suddenly that she didn’t have time to avoid it, even though she had her hands on the wheel and was alert.
Reuters news agency previously reported that a 2016 video used by Tesla to promote its self-driving technology was actually staged to show capabilities — such as stopping at a red light and accelerating at a green light — that the system lacked, according to testimony from a senior engineer.
The details about the video came from a statement made by a Tesla executive in another case.
That director, Ashok Elluswamy, director of Autopilot software at Tesla, testified about the videotape at Hsu’s trial last week.