Ruling clears way for lawsuit brought against company over fatal crash in 2019 in which Stephen Banner was killed near Miami

Judge finds ‘reasonable evidence’ Tesla knew self-driving tech was defective::Ruling clears way for lawsuit brought against company over fatal crash in 2019 in which Stephen Banner was killed near Miami

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    4·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    A judge has found “reasonable evidence” that Elon Musk and other executives at Tesla knew that the company’s self-driving technology was defective but still allowed the cars to be driven in an unsafe manner anyway, according to a recent ruling issued in Florida.

    The lawsuit, brought by Banner’s wife, accuses the company of intentional misconduct and gross negligence, which could expose Tesla to punitive damages.

    The ruling comes after Tesla won two product liability lawsuits in California earlier this year focused on alleged defects in its Autopilot system.

    “It would be reasonable to conclude that the Defendant Tesla through its CEO and engineers was acutely aware of the problem with the ‘Autopilot’ failing to detect cross traffic,” the judge wrote.

    Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina law professor, told Reuters that the judge’s summary of the evidence was significant because it suggests “alarming inconsistencies” between what Tesla knew internally, and what it was saying in its marketing.

    “This opinion opens the door for a public trial in which the judge seems inclined to admit a lot of testimony and other evidence that could be pretty awkward for Tesla and its CEO,” Smith said.

    The original article contains 462 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 58%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
      24·
      10 months ago

      “It would be reasonable to conclude that the Defendant Tesla through its CEO and engineers was acutely aware of the problem with the ‘Autopilot’ failing to detect cross traffic,” the judge wrote.

      If that’s what this centers I don’t think this necessarily a correct ruling

      That semi was moving fairly slowly as it was crossing the road as any semi would from a stop.

      Radar does not detect stationary objects at high speeds, which this slow moving cross traffic vehicle could look like. I imagine there’s some limit where a cross traffic item moving very slowly would appear for all intents and purposes stationary as it fills the entire roadway horizontally and not just a portion of it.

      The car explicitly warns you that Radar won’t detect stationary objects at high speeds. Other manufacturers explicitly warn about this very same problem as well.

      It’ll be interesting to see what happens with this case, but if that’s what it hinges on, IMO, it doesn’t look good for the plaintiff.