Tesla argues that the over $242M verdict in deadly Autopilot trial 'flies in the face' of the law and 'common sense'

Core Viewpoint - Tesla's attorneys are contesting a $242.5 million jury verdict that found the company partly liable for a fatal crash in Florida, arguing that the judgment contradicts Florida tort law and common sense [1][2]. Legal Arguments - Tesla's legal team claims that upholding the verdict would stifle innovation, jeopardize road safety, and lead to excessive liability for manufacturers introducing new safety features [2]. - The company asserts that the driver, not the Autopilot software, was solely responsible for the crash, emphasizing that auto manufacturers should not be held liable for the actions of reckless drivers [3][5]. Jury Verdict Details - The Florida jury determined Tesla was 33% responsible for the crash, resulting in a total damages award of $329 million, which includes $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages [4][5]. - Consequently, Tesla is liable for $42.5 million in compensatory damages and the full punitive damages amount, totaling $242.5 million [5]. Trial Conduct - Tesla's attorneys argue that the trial was influenced by irrelevant and prejudicial evidence presented by the plaintiffs, which included data preservation issues and comments from CEO Elon Musk [11][12]. - The plaintiffs' focus on Tesla's data handling post-accident was deemed irrelevant, as experts confirmed that the data was intact and provided valuable insights [11]. Implications for Innovation - Tesla's appellate lawyer warns that verdicts like this could hinder safety innovation and create negative incentives for manufacturers to develop new safety technologies [14]. - The plaintiffs' attorney contends that the verdict reflects Tesla's unsafe development of its Autopilot system rather than a broader indictment of the autonomous vehicle industry [15].