Jury finds Tesla 1% negligent in high-speed fatal crash

The plaintiffs claimed a device installed on the car to limit its speed was disabled by a Telsa technician without their knowledge.

Barrett Riley had been driving at 116 mph on a curve with a posted speed limit of 25 mph on May 8, 2018. He lost control of his vehicle, a 2014 Model S, which collided with a concrete wall and burst into flames. A second passenger also died but a third passenger survived the fiery crash. (Photo: Tesla Model 3 crash, Miami-Dade County, Florida. Credit: National Transportation Safety Board)

In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, a jury has found Tesla 1% negligent in the death of an 18-year-old man whose Model S sedan slammed into a concrete wall after the car’s speed limiter had been deactivated. The teenager and his father were found to be 99% at fault. The case is Riley v. Tesla, Inc., No. 20-CV-60517-VALLE, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115266 (S.D. Fla. June 29, 2022).

Barrett Riley had been driving at 116 miles per hour, on a curve with a posted speed limit of 25 mph, on May 8, 2018. Riley lost control of his vehicle, a 2014 Model S, while trying to pass another vehicle. The Model S collided with a concrete wall and burst into flames. A second passenger also died but a third passenger survived the fiery crash.

James and Jenny Riley, the parents of deceased Barrett Riley, claimed that the crash occurred after a Tesla technician, without their knowledge, disabled a device that had been installed at their request, which capped the Model S’ speed at 85 mph.

Tesla claimed that Barrett Riley’s recklessness caused the crash and his parents should have taken the car keys from him after he received a speeding ticket for driving at 112 mph in March 2018. The company also claimed that Barrett tricked the Tesla technician into disabling the speed limiter.

The Riley’s claimed that the crash was “entirely survivable” and that a design defect in Tesla’s lithium-ion battery cells and battery pack contributed to the fire, and if Tesla had included a certain feature between the battery cells, they would not have been crushed and the fire would not have resulted. A judge dismissed that claim.

The jury found Tesla to be 1% negligent, Barrett Riley 90% negligent, and James Riley 9% negligent in Barrett’s death. The jury said that James and Jenny Riley suffered a respective $4.5 million and $6 million of damages for pain and suffering. The apportionment of responsibility means that Tesla will only be liable for $105,000.

Tesla has faced many lawsuits and regulatory probes over the past few years over crashes associated with the poorly named “Autopilot feature.” According to court records, autopilot did not play a role in the wreck at the center of this lawsuit.

Attorneys have said that this is the first known case involving a Tesla crash that has gone to trial.

Insurance Coverage Law Center editor’s note: Since the introduction of autonomous vehicles, the insurance industry has been grappling with how to insure cars using various levels of autonomy. While in the end, it was not an issue in this case, the question of whether crashes were caused by the driving system or the driver will increasingly be a factor in determining liability.

In this situation, the problem was the fire caused by the lithium-ion batteries, which are known to be problematic in event of a fire. They do not extinguish as readily as other vehicle batteries, and they burn for a long time at a high temperature. Once these batteries are damaged, fire becomes a significant hazard. Once the battery catches fire it is difficult to extinguish and may reignite, even several hours later.

Related: