Tesla challenges $243 million verdict in Autopilot death trial

Tesla tells a judge to do Nix Rule of $ 243 million According to the filing of the new court, the company has been allowed to allow a case involved in its autopilot system or in a new trial.

The lawyers of the organization argued that the verdict, which was a jury earlier this month, was “Florida torture law, proper process clause and general knowledge.” This latest filing of Tesla lawyers once again tries all the blame on the driver George McGi, who helped the cause of the accident.

The jury of the case eventually decided that the driver received two-thirds of the fault and attributed one-third of Tesla to Tesla.

The high-profile case centers on the 2019 crash in Florida. McGG was running the Tesla Model S at night and using the company’s Autopilot Driver Support System (which is a less full-feature “full self-driving (under supervision)” software. The driver needs to put a hand on the wheel on both systems.

When he reached a perpendicular-park SUV, the McGG or Autopilot system did not apply the brakes. MacGie’s car has blown a stop sign and has hit SUV, killing 20 -year -old Naibal Benavides Leone and injured his boyfriend Dillon Angulo seriously.

McGie was sued separately and settled with the victims. This week, we have learned that Tesla Refuses to offer a settlement Million from the victims a few months before the verdict is $ 60 million.

Tesla’s lawyers have argued in the new filing that the Liability Law is considered to punish manufacturers whose cars are “performing the cars that are dangerously denying the expectations of ordinary customers or inadvertently dangerous.”

“This is not the case – not the slightest,” they wrote. They say that McGiegie’s “extraordinary reckless” was blamed, because he reached the crash on his phone – a fact that he acknowledged himself in his case.

The verdict is to stand, they argue, “Innovation will prevent consumer expectations, and when the manufacturers abuse their products, they will lead to renounce protection enhancement for fear of being subjected to major punishment.”

Tesla’s lawyers have also taken shots to the opposition lawyers of the filing, claiming that “this jury was very superstitious but impressed with the flood of irrelevant evidence – about data conservation, alon musk and a different accident.”

They wrote, “The plaintiff’s consultant confirmed that this trial was not actually about the accident due to the reckless driving of 2019 Tesla Model S or Macgie.”

The top attorney Brett Shriba for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to the request to make any comment.