Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $243 million in fatal Autopilot crash
(Reuters) -A Florida jury on Friday found Tesla liable to pay $243 million to victims of a 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped Model S, a verdict that could encourage more legal action against Elon Musk's electric vehicle company.
The verdict is a rare win for victims of accidents involving Autopilot. Musk has been pushing to rapidly expand Tesla's recently launched robotaxi business based on an advanced version of its driver assistance software.
Tesla shares fell 1.8% on Friday, and are down 25% this year.
Jurors in Miami federal court awarded the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon, as well as her former boyfriend Dillon Angulo, $129 million in compensatory damages plus $200 million in punitive damages, according to a verdict sheet.
Tesla was held liable for 33% of the compensatory damages, or $42.6 million.
Jurors found the driver George McGee liable for 67%, but he was not a defendant and will not have to pay his share.
"Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
"Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries," he added.
Tesla said it will appeal.
"Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," the company said.
The plaintiffs had sought $345 million of damages. Their lawyers said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot.
IMPACT ON FUTURE CASES
Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without getting to trial.
In June, a judge rejected Tesla's bid to dismiss the Florida case. Experts said Friday's verdict may spur more lawsuits, and could make future settlements more costly.
"It's a big deal," said Alex Lemann, a law professor at Marquette University. "This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgment in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its Autopilot technology."
The verdict could also impede efforts by Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles as well as robotaxis it plans to start producing next year.
As Tesla's electric vehicle sales fall, much of its nearly $1 trillion market value hinges on Musk's ability to pivot the company into robotics and artificial intelligence.
DRIVER'S ROLE
The trial concerned an April 25, 2019 incident where George McGee drove his 2019 Model S at about 62 mph (100 kph) through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder.
McGee had reached down to pick up a cellphone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV.
Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 75 feet (23 meters) to her death, while Angulo suffered serious injuries.
"We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash," said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology.
"The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software," he added. "That's a big deal."
Tesla, in its statement, said McGee was entirely at fault.
"To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash," the company said. "This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs' lawyers blaming the car when the driver - from day one - admitted and accepted responsibility."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
5 minutes ago
- Forbes
How ‘Vibe Coding' Is Creating A New AI Economy
In early January, 18‑year‑old Justin Jin launched Giggles — an AI-powered social entertainment app that's reportedly attracted over 120,000 waitlist sign-ups and generated 150 million impressions — all without a venture capital war chest, a marketing budget, or a traditional engineering team. Instead, he and his team of young co-founders leveraged AI to build an app for Gen Alpha and Gen Z, where users interact through AI-generated content, digital collectibles and gamified social engagements. A few weeks later, another startup arrived on the scene — Base44, founded by a non-technical creator who used AI to 'vibe code' a no-code development platform. Within six months and under ten people, it reached profitability, pulled in 300,000 users and sold to Wix for $80 million in cash, according to TechCrunch. Suddenly, a new archetype emerged: Companies not founded on traditional engineering teams, but shaped by creativity, culture and AI orchestration. This is the story of the moment. AI is redefining entrepreneurship, allowing people with a vision and cultural understanding — but not necessarily computer-science degrees — to ship platform-level products. But questions are mounting: Can this new model of entrepreneurship scale beyond prototype success without deeper engineering muscle? The Rise Of Vibe Coding Two years ago, the phrase 'vibe coding' barely existed. Today, it's everywhere. The term — coined by Andrej Karpathy, former AI lead at Tesla and cofounder of OpenAI — describes writing with AI by simply speaking ideas. 'You fully give in to the vibes, embrace exponentials and forget that the code even exists,' Karpathy tweeted in February. It's shorthand for a new era, where programming is done through a natural language like English. According to Garry Tan, CEO of Y Combinator, many startups now use AI to generate up to 95% of their codebase — achieving results that once required teams of 50 to 100 engineers with fewer than ten people. Meanwhile, in a recent article for Business Insider, Alistair Barr highlighted how 'non‑traditional, AI‑native developers' are turning natural language into apps, fundamentally altering SaaS economics. This shift is democratizing entrepreneurship. Product managers, artists, even high-schoolers can now ship products faster than ever before, all without technical expertise. But it also comes with some problems. As Nigel Douglas, head of developer relations at Cloudsmith, cautioned in the Financial Times, 'If you're creating an app in your spare time, a 'DIY disaster' might just mean an ugly interface. But in a business setting, the wrong tool can do real damage and result in data breaches, service outages, or a compromised software supply chain.' GitHub CEO Thomas Dohmke echoed this warning at the just-concluded VivaTech in Paris: 'A non‑technical founder will find it difficult to build a startup at scale without developers,' adding that tools like vibe coding don't provide the depth needed to justify serious investment. Even AI-native founders acknowledge the model's limitations. 'There's a need to build technical depth. We know that's important and are expanding engineering operations and bringing on advisors,' said Edwin Wang, co-founder of Giggles. 'The future, however, must be a community-governed and decentralized future where there's a balance between creativity and coding.' When Creativity Replaces Code: The Giggles Test Case Giggles is a microcosm of this transformation. Jin, alongside co-founders Edwin Wang and music artist Matthew Hershoff, built a system where users are rewarded for digital expression through game-like interactions — including AI-generated videos, collectible content, and daily quests. The result was a storytelling-centric platform developed without a traditional coding team — a structure that reflects the emerging blueprint behind many Gen Z–led apps. Jin previously founded Mediababy, which sold for $3.8 million, according to Reuters. That experience, he said, shaped his belief that platforms thrive when they prioritize user expression and fluid engagement over rigid structure. At Giggles, that belief translated into a product anchored in prompt-driven creativity, gamified feedback loops, and community-led interaction. As Wang noted, the company positions itself not just as an alternative to TikTok, but as a platform tailored for a generation it believes is increasingly disengaged from traditional social formats. And according to Hershoff, 'creators aren't limited to just posting photos and videos. They can vibe code a game, develop an app, create a whole virtual world and post it on Giggles.' Can AI-First Startups Scale? For all the momentum behind AI-native startups, there's a hard truth facing founders like Jin: culture can spark attention, but infrastructure sustains it. Platforms like Giggles, which thrive on virality and creator energy, eventually confront the same foundational question as any company with ambition. Can they scale securely, reliably, repeatedly and with technical discipline? At this stage, Giggles is less an anomaly and more a litmus test for how AI is transforming digital entrepreneurship. It's a living experiment in what happens when creativity, not technical expertise, drives product development. But to evolve from prompt-powered outfits into structured business ecosystems, these companies will need more than just vibes. They will need systems, safeguards and engineering depth. That's where founders must reckon with the limits of what vibe coding can achieve. Dohmke's warning at VivaTech isn't a dismissal of AI's potential, but a reminder of where the handoff happens. While AI can accelerate the zero-to-one moment, scaling responsibly requires the engineering rigor to turn a clever idea into a truly dependable platform. Jin and his team appear to recognize that. While Giggles was built without a traditional engineering stack, the company is now investing in its technical foundation. Wang, the platform's co-founder and lead developer, acknowledges that 'scaling creativity still requires coding discipline.' That doesn't diminish their AI-first origin; it refines it. The next test for Giggles — and others like it — isn't whether AI can launch a product. It's whether that product can become the infrastructure others depend on. A Hybrid Future For Founders What might the next decade yield? The trends point at a wave of hybrid founders: People with vivid creative vision and AI fluency who bring in veteran operators and engineers to solidify their product. That's the emerging blueprint: rapid prototyping, followed by structural discipline. Industry stalwart Reid Hoffman sees that promise, noting that 'bringing AI into your toolkit makes you enormously attractive.' But he and others caution that early AI advantage doesn't equal long-term lead. As AI-generated code gets better, so too must practices around testing, review, and security. In the end, the rise of vibe coding is real, but it's only half the story. Architecture, execution and human judgment are what matters most. While Giggles, Base44 and the rising 'AI-native' wave might be writing the prologue, the plot turns on whether these founders can turn vibe into real structure. 'In the end,' Jin told me, 'it's not just about who can build fast. It's about who can build something that lasts.'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Yankees are paying 3 players a combined $43.8 million to not play for them
The New York Yankees have always been known for having a lot of money. They may not be the richest franchise in baseball anymore, though. The New York Mets and Los Angeles Dodgers seem to be shelling out even more dough. But the Yankees have one financial flex going for them, if it can be called a flex. And it's this: They're currently paying three players a combined $43.8 million not to play for them. Those three guys are DJ LeMahieu, Aaron Hicks and Marcus Stroman. The number works out to $43,785,714, to be exact. MORE: Cubs' Matthew Boyd has mastered the balk pickoff move Baseball contracts, unlike many of those in other professional sports, are fully guaranteed upon signing. That means when the Yankees get rid of Hicks in the past, or LeMahieu and Stroman this season, they're still owed their money. Stroman was just released after his last start, a bit of a surprise move. And like Stroman, both Hicks and LeMahieu were better before getting their latest Yankees contracts than they were afterward. MORE: Red Sox leapfrog the Yankees in the standings for first time since March As a big-market club with deep pockets, the Yankees can afford to make mistakes in contracts every once in a while. It's still not ideal that these mistakes are costing more than $43 million to guys not currently wearing the pinstripes in any form. The $43 million might not come in handy now, but it could matter greatly down the line. That's very real money that the Yankees won't have from production they aren't getting anyway. MORE MLB NEWS: White Sox batters have turned into 1927 Yankees Steven Kwan shows kindness on the most stressful day of his MLB career Marlins' Jakob Marsee starts his MLB career in a way no one ever has Rockies' Warming Bernabel is red hot Oneil Cruz makes one of the best throws in MLB history Red Sox phenom Roman Anthony makes MLB history not done since Elmer Valo in 1940
CNN
37 minutes ago
- CNN
Boeing's second strike in less than a year begins at three defense plants
Labor unionsFacebookTweetLink Follow Boeing on Monday was hit with its second strike in less than a year, as 3,200 hourly machinists walked off their aerospace jobs in the St. Louis area. Members of the International Association of Machinists (IAM) voted to authorize a strike at three defense plants starting Monday at 12:59 a.m. ET. '3,200 highly-skilled IAM Union members at Boeing went on strike at midnight because enough is enough,' the union wrote on X after the walkout began. The union overwhelmingly rejected a tentative agreement a week ago that would have given many of the members raises of 40% over the four-year life of the contract. The members voted Sunday to reject a revised contract that removed scheduling provisions that had prompted objections from rank-and-file members. 'IAM District 837 members build the aircraft and defense systems that keep our country safe,' IAM Midwest Territory General Vice President Sam Cicinelli said in a statement Sunday. 'They deserve nothing less than a contract that keeps their families secure and recognizes their unmatched expertise.' The strike is the latest blow to Boeing, following six years of massive financial losses and setbacks in many areas of its business, including the defense and space unit affected by this strike. The company has rung up core operating losses of $42.2 billion since the second quarter of 2019. That was after the fatal crashes of two commercial 737 Max planes and the subsequent 20-month grounding of the model. The company's problems in its commercial plane unit have, understandably, gotten the most attention. But Boeing Defense, Space and Security unit also logged nearly $11 billion in losses from late 2021 through the end of last year. That was largely due to Pentagon contracts that made the company responsible for cost overruns, including two new Air Force One jets. But so far this year, the unit has been profitable. The workers in St. Louis and St. Charles, Missouri, and Mascoutah, Illinois, build such military aircraft as F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets, the T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the MQ-25 Stingray unmanned refueler. The F-47 stealth fighter jet, the Pentagon's next-generation fighter plane, is due to be built at a Boeing plant in the St. Louis area, though the company has not said which plant will build it or when production will start. Boeing also operates some nonunion plants in the area. 'We're disappointed our employees rejected an offer that featured 40% average wage growth and resolved their primary issue on alternative work schedules,' said a statement from Dan Gillian, Boeing general manager and senior St. Louis site executive. 'We are prepared for a strike and have fully implemented our contingency plan to ensure our non-striking workforce can continue supporting our customers.' Earlier this week, Boeing said that a $5,000 signing bonus that was part of its offers to the union would be withdrawn if the members did not ratify a deal before the strike deadline. The IAM negotiating committee had recommended that members ratify the deal presented last week. 'With stronger pensions, real wage growth, and better work-life balance, we've delivered a contract that meets the moment,' the committee said at the time. But less than 5% of the rank-and-file workers of IAM Local 837, which represents the defense workers, voted for that tentative agreement. The union did not give precise results in Sunday's votes. Despite years of serious financial problems, Boeing is still one of the nation's largest manufacturers, with contractors spread across all 50 states. It also has a huge backlog of contracts, for both commercial and military aircraft, that will keep it in business. Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg said in the company's earnings call last week that he believes the company will be able to weather the costs of the strike, which he suggested would be far less than the cost of last year's strike of 33,000 commercial plane unit workers. 'The order of magnitude of this is much, much less than what we saw last fall,' he said. 'I wouldn't worry too much about the implications of the strike. We'll manage our way through that.'
