Miami Jury: Tesla Just 1% to Blame for Teen Driver's Fiery Crash
The apportionment of responsibility means Tesla will only be liable for $105,000.
July 21, 2022 at 08:49 AM
3 minute read
A jury in Florida has found Tesla just 1% negligent in a fiery crash that killed two teens, for disabling a speed limiter on the electric car.
Tuesday's verdict placed 90% of the blame on the driver, Barrett Riley, and 9% on his father, James Riley, who brought the lawsuit against Tesla.
It's the first known case involving a Tesla crash that has gone to trial, said Michael Brooks, acting exective director at the Center for Auto Safety, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization.
Barrett Riley and his friend Edgar Monserrat Martinez were about to graduate from their private school in South Florida when they died in the May 2018 crash near Fort Lauderdale Beach. A backseat passenger was ejected and survived.
The National Transportation Safety Board determined he was driving at 116 mph (186 kph) in a 30 mph (48 kph) zone, and the most likely cause of the crash "was the driver's loss of control as a result of excessive speed."
James Riley claimed the crash was "entirely survivable" and that it was the ensuing fire that killed the teenagers, but the judge dismissed his lawsuit's claim that Tesla designed defective lithium ion batteries that "burst into an uncontrollable and fatal fire" upon impact.
James Riley also said Tesla removed a speed limiter without his permission. He had ordered the instrument installed to prevent his son from driving at more than 85 mph (136 kph).
An investigation found that about a month before the crash, the teen asked workers at Tesla's Dania Beach dealership to return the car to normal operating mode while it was being serviced.
Tesla denied negligence in disabling the speed limiter. The company argued that the teen's parents were negligent in allowing him to drive the vehicle "when they were aware of his history of speeding and reckless driving," according to the judge's instructions to the jury.
Brooks, at the Center for Auto Safety, said other lawsuits are pending against Tesla involving the vehicle's autopilot and full self-driving systems.
Jurors recommended awarding the teen's mother Jenny Riley $6 million for pain and suffering, and $4.5 million to the father, the newspaper reported.
But the apportionment of responsibility means Tesla will only be liable for $105,000, which is equivalent to 1% of the negligence as determined by the verdict, according to Curt Miner, an attorney representing the Riley family.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Tampa Jury Returns $5.8M Verdict Against Insurer Who Denied Coverage
2 minute readEven the Chief Judge Noted the Cost of This Broward Case
Marriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Trending Stories
- 1Trump Taps Former Fla. Attorney General for AG
- 2Newsom Names Two Judges to Appellate Courts in San Francisco, Orange County
- 3Biden Has Few Ways to Protect His Environmental Legacy, Say Lawyers, Advocates
- 4UN Treaty Enacting Cybercrime Standards Likely to Face Headwinds in US, Other Countries
- 5Clark Hill Acquires L&E Boutique in Mexico City, Adding 5 Lawyers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250