In a sharp setback for Tesla, a Miami federal judge on Friday refused to overturn a $243 million jury verdict stemming from a 2019 Key Largo crash that killed 22-year-old Naibel Benavides and left her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, critically injured. U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom found that the trial record supported the jury’s findings, keeping in place a high-profile federal ruling that tied a Tesla Model S equipped with Autopilot to the fatal collision, as the company gears up for an appeal.
Judge keeps jury award intact
Judge Bloom denied Tesla’s post-trial requests for a new trial and to set aside the verdict, concluding that the automaker did not present any new legal basis that would warrant disturbing the jury’s decision, according to TechCrunch. The order, made public Friday, essentially reaffirms the court’s earlier rulings and rejects Tesla’s argument that the crash rested solely on the driver’s conduct. For now, the jury’s allocation of fault and the size of the award remain untouched.
How the award was calculated
At trial last August, jurors granted $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages, for a total of $329 million from which Tesla’s share was derived, and they assigned roughly one third of the fault to the company, leaving it responsible for about $243 million, per Investing.com. Jurors found the driver 67 percent at fault, but they imposed punitive damages only on Tesla, a split, and a dollar figure, that now sit at the heart of the company’s planned appeal.
Forensic data changed the case
Jurors were swayed in part by technical evidence that included a collision "snapshot" pulled from the Tesla’s Autopilot control unit and an annotated crash reconstruction shown at trial, according to The Washington Post. Court papers and filings describe the wreck as happening on April 25, 2019, at a T-intersection on Card Sound Road in Key Largo, Florida, a detail reflected in the case docket and related court documents. Court records show that plaintiffs introduced the recovered data after a technical extraction that Tesla’s defense team has challenged.
Tesla’s response and what comes next
Tesla maintains the crash stemmed from a distracted driver rather than any flaw in its system and has said it will appeal, arguing after trial that the verdict should either be thrown out or the damages reduced. Coverage of the judge’s order notes that legal observers expect the company to take its case to the Eleventh Circuit, with more briefing and procedural skirmishes to follow. In an interview included in reporting on the ruling, a plaintiffs’ attorney said Tesla had long denied responsibility, a point echoed in coverage by the Daily Business Review, and family members say the judgment offers a measure of accountability even as the appeals process begins.
Legal implications
Beyond the enormous payout, lawyers and safety advocates are watching the ruling as a bellwether for other Autopilot related lawsuits and for regulators scrutinizing how driver assist systems are marketed and overseen, according to coverage that has followed the post-trial fallout. Plaintiffs’ attorneys and safety experts say the outcome could shape future settlements and enforcement actions, while Tesla’s legal team is expected to lean heavily on procedural and statutory challenges as the appeal moves forward.
