In yet another blow to Tesla, Florida ju umpire handed out a historic verdict, ordering Tesla to pay $243 million in damages to be fined for a fatal crash, including the 2019 autopilot system.
The ruling, which held Tesla primarily responsible for the death of 22-year-old Nybel Benavides Leon and seriously injured her boyfriend, Dillon Anglo, can force the government and automakers to rethink the legal framework of autonomous driving technology.
The incident occurred in Key Largo, Florida on April 25, 2019, when George McGee, driving a Tesla model at 62 miles, ran the stop sign and crashed into a parked Chevrolet Tahoe. Benavides Leon and Anglo were standing by the vehicle when the collision occurred. Benavides Leon was killed immediately, but Anglo maintained traumatic brain damage, fractures, and permanent psychological trauma. McGee admitted to reach for the dropped phone, but the ju-decides found it to be responsible for failing to warn him or the brakes because Tesla’s autopilot was engaged at the time.
Miami federal court awarded $129 million in compensatory damages, with Tesla facing 33% ($42.6 million) and $200 million in punitive damages, punishing Tesla for reckless conduct. The plaintiff’s lawyers alleged that Tesla “designed autopilot only for controlled access highways, but deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere.” Schreiber said the Ju judge’s decision was “justice in the tragic death of Nybel and the injury of Dillon’s life.”
The $243 million Tesla Autopilot Fine Call Questions the Definition of “Safety”
Tesla, which is scheduled to appeal, calls the verdict “false” and a setback for the safety of cars, claiming that “we didn’t have cars in 2019 and didn’t prevent this crash today.” The company argued that McGee was completely negligent, stressing that autopilots need constant driver surveillance. However, the ju-degree decision to assign Tesla a large slice of responsibility cites concerns about system limitations and Tesla’s marketing.
The trial was the first trial involving the illegal deaths of third parties linked to autopilot, setting precedent for Tesla’s legal battle. With around 12 similar cases pending, experts predict that court decisions will set precedents that can encourage more cases and increased settlement costs.
The ruling comes at a critical time for Tesla, with shares falling 25% in 2025. Musk is currently looking to expand Tesla’s Robotaxis business while relying on advanced versions of its driver assistance software. However, the verdict challenges the definition of a company’s “safety” in marketing. As Tesla’s $1 trillion market value is linked to AI and robotics ambitions, this result could complicate efforts to beat investors and regulators.
The Tesla Fine is the issue of that autopilot in Europe
Questions about how safe self-driving cars around the world are. The Florida verdict arrives as Europe investigates a patchwork of self-driving cars regulations and has a major impact on the ambitions of automakers. In countries such as Italy, Poland, Greece and Spain, there is no specific legal framework, and autonomous vehicles beyond the level 2 advanced driver assistance system are largely prohibited on public roads, as there is no specific legal framework to limit testing with special permits.
Meanwhile, countries such as France, the UK, Sweden and Switzerland have embraced a much higher level of autonomy in vehicles, allowing level 3, and sometimes a specific route or level 4 vehicles with safety drivers, as seen in the 2027 Automobile Act, as seen in the 2022 regulations and the UK Automated Vehicle Act. The Autonomous Driving Act will allow level 3 systems such as Autobahns’ Mercedes-Benz drive pilots and other regional level 4 vehicles, setting the benchmark for the fully automated driving rollout planned by Tesla in 2025. With the Tesla Autopilot system, the driver must always have both hands on the steering wheel. The trend among many drivers is to tie two bottles of mineral water to either side of the steering wheel, tricking the onboard computer and thinking that the driver is still paying attention to the road.
