Tesla sued for passenger death due to defective battery

[Tam]

Tesla sued for passenger death due to defective battery | Reuters

It claims Tesla “failed to warn purchasers of its vehicles of the battery’s dangerous condition.”

Tesla does mention in owner's manual under "High Voltage Safety":

"In the unlikely event that a fire occurs, immediately contact your local fire emergency responders."

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Kinda obvious but: expecting the car to remain safe during and after colliding into a solid concrete wall at 116MPH is absurd beyond belief. The lawyers who agreed to take this case are scum. (I can’t and won’t blame parents who just lost their son for their reaction, whatever it might be).

 

[commasign]

I would blame the parents for being really bad parents. The fact that they had to enable the limiter suggests this isn't the first time their kid drove at high speeds.

 

[OPRCE]

Zero evidence of a defective battery much less that it caused/contributed to a death in this case.

How can they even prove he survived the crash per se, in order to then die in the fire?

Martinez' chum Riley was the only negligent party, having had the restrictor removed and then incompetently driving like a loon @116mph in a 30 zone, but his estate probably had not a bean to its name so is not worth the shysters' time to sue, hence this Hail Mary attempt to extort Tesla using the threat of generating negative press.

NHTSA report

 

[MXWing]

Parents are pathetically and shamelessly dishonoring their sons memory in a lawsuit they are certain to lose.

The only person they could possibly sue is the estate of the driver of the Tesla that went 116MPH.

Not only do you have to worry about your own kids being dumbasses but anyone they associate with.

 

[MP3Mike]

expecting the car to remain safe during and after colliding into a solid concrete wall at 116MPH

From what I read the collision with the wall was only at 86 MPH. (116MPH was ~3 seconds prior to the collision.)

 

[MXWing]

From what I read the collision with the wall was only at 86 MPH. (116MPH was ~3 seconds prior to the collision.)

Good to know for discussion but should be semantics for the lawsuit.

Ffs I’m sure the driver was doing a criminal act.

Have they no shame.

 

[Tam]

Good to know for discussion...

The NTSB says that witnesses saw the driver moved to the left lane to pass a car then attempted to move back and lost control at that time.

The recorded speed was:

-3 seconds=116 MPH
-2 seconds=108 MPH
Restraint Control Module command deployment (airbags...)=86 MPH

That road there is not very straight and not designed for high speed as the yellow left curve caution sign was posted as 25 MPH:

Maybe that teenage driver should have been enrolled in a performance Driving and should do all he could race 24/7 at the race track until he could get tired of it.

If a teen does not know the difference between a street curve and a race track then it's an invitation for disaster regardless of which brand of cars.

It's a tragic highspeed story and hopefully, young people will learn because of the publicity of this lawsuit.

 

[Canuck]

Not much different to me than this lawsuit:

Daughter of actor Paul Walker files wrongful-death suit against Porsche

And like the one above, and the vast majority of lawsuits, it will likely settle before it sees a courtroom.

...in a lawsuit they are certain to lose.

As with most actions, it's not even certain it will go to trial -- and looking at Tesla's history of settling rather than going to trial, I don't see how anyone call this one with certainty -- but only time will tell.

My money is on a settlement with a NDA regarding the amount, like most of the cases posted here end up.

 

[MXWing]

Family of teen killed in fiery Tesla crash sues car manufacturer

Local news source.

And like the one above, and the vast majority of lawsuits, it will likely settle before it sees a courtroom.

I hope Tesla fights this. The *sugar* head hit the barrier at 86MPH. Think 1 MPH (IF the limiter was installed) would have made any difference?

The plaintiff is really to go off and with some crap like well.. the deceleration to 86MPH to 0MPH never would have happened if he wasnt allowed to go to 116 MPH in the first place!!

FFS, the driver was 18. So was the friend. Age of majority and voting in the United States.

Tesla should counter sue due to the lawsuit being frivolous.

 

[widodh]

Family of teen killed in fiery Tesla crash sues car manufacturer
Tesla should counter sue due to the lawsuit being frivolous.

Or just leave it as it is after they win. No need to keep suing each other.

It's just a dumb lawsuit to me (as a European). The kids were driving too fast. That's what's killed them, not Tesla, not the car, not anybody else.

The parents can't be blamed to the fully extend either, kids grow up and do stupid things, sometimes with horrible results. The fact that the parents asked for a speed limiter is odd as well.

That Tesla removed it was probably by accident when a firmware upgrade was performed on the vehicle.

The worst people in this whole story: The lawyers.....

 

[Tam]

Family of teen killed in fiery Tesla crash sues car manufacturer

Local news source...

Thanks for the article.

It's interesting that it mentions there's a "device" to limit Tesla's top speed to 85 MPH. And that "device" was removed by Tesla employee James Constantino.

Maybe this is the lawsuit terminology for a "software limited" feature and not a physical "device" that can be physically installed and removed.

Maybe 85 MPH is Tesla's test drive / inventory mode which Tesla is not obligated to do that but it was done as a courtesy.

At least, now I know that the current speed limiter software feature is not about slowing down a thief but "in dedication to the driver Barrett Riley".

 

[OPRCE]

Not much different to me than this lawsuit:

Daughter of actor Paul Walker files wrongful-death suit against Porsche

And like the one above, and the vast majority of lawsuits, it will likely settle before it sees a courtroom.

As with most actions, it's not even certain it will go to trial -- and looking at Tesla's history of settling rather than going to trial, I don't see how anyone call this one with certainty -- but only time will tell.

My money is on a settlement with a NDA regarding the amount, like most of the cases posted here end up.

The final outcomes of Walker v Porsche and the related one are highly relevant:

Meadow Walker settles wrongful death lawsuit with Porsche | Daily Mail Online

"Meadow Walker [daughter] previously was awarded $10.1 million in a 2016 settlement from the estate of Roger Rodas [driver in fatal smash killing himself and Paul Walker]."

So her lawyers rightfully extracted their pounds of flesh from the estate of he who inarguably directly caused the wrongful death by dangerous driving and the suit against the OEM was later quietly settled, most probably with no cash changing hands between the parties.

If such lawsuits were to actually succeed against OEMs, none could survive to make cars capable of exceeding the speed limit at all. Nanny State ahoy!

 

[Tam]

...the suit against the OEM was later quietly settled, most probably with no cash changing hands between the parties....

Very interesting analysis!

The driver's widow also sued Porsche but

Judge finds Porsche isn’t responsible for crash that killed Paul Walker

 

[OPRCE]

Very interesting analysis!

The driver's widow also sued Porsche but

Judge finds Porsche isn’t responsible for crash that killed Paul Walker

Yep, good find! Any one can make claims but proving causation with "competent evidence" is a whole 'nother bale of wax.

Technically, though, I sure the judge will simply have found she failed to prove her claims and the wanton journaille stretched that into a legally impossible but more titillating headline.

These suits are akin to claiming that a bicycle manufacturer is responsible for the fate of some fool who, refusing to use the perfectly adequate brakes provided, recklessly rides their product down a mountainside into a stout redwood, on the matronizing premise that the OEM should have foreseen the inevitable necessity to further equip it with a roll-cage and automatic airbags to save the sub-consciously suicidal from themselves, despite the economic reality that no-one would ever buy such a vehicle in the first place.

i.e. it is Ludicrous Mode for lawyers on too much speed.

 

[Merrill]

This is just another money grab, if you had to limit the speed to 85 there is something wrong. Plus if they went 85 in a 25 they would still be in danger.

 

[MountainPass]

How can they even prove he survived the crash per se, in order to then die in the fire?

I'm no expert, but I think his trachea/lungs would be burnt from breathing fire/high-temperature air.

 

[OPRCE]

I'm no expert, but I think his trachea/lungs would be burnt from breathing fire/high-temperature air.

Right but that's only possible if he escaped or was removed from the vehicle somewhat intact. From the photos it seems at least as likely that his body was about completely cremated in situ. Lithium ion batteries burn at ~1000°C, so there may have been very little left for a pathologist to examine.

 

[Canuck]

It's just a dumb lawsuit to me (as a European).

The negligence laws in the US (and Canada), are based on the common-law, that was brought to us from Europe (the UK). So you Europeans are to blame for this lawsuit!

If such lawsuits were to actually succeed against OEMs, none could survive to make cars capable of exceeding the speed limit at all. Nanny State ahoy!

The lawsuit won't be about making a car that goes over the speed limit. But it will be about safety and require significant disclosure and legal expense, and risk, even if very small. Which is exactly why most settle because the court precedent is not something OEMs want. But to suggest they are all dismissed at trial rather than settled goes against the facts. Some go to trial, of course, like Porsche did, but to say they paid nothing on one claim before going to court on another is pure speculation and highly unlikely, in my view.

Paul Walker’s Daughter Meadow Settles With Porsche in Wrongful Death Lawsuit

As to the "Nanny State ahoy", agreed, and that's why we need tort reform.

 

[Tam]

I looked up old theads and the 85 MPH limiter is most likely software limited to some cars (brand new inventory, loaners, demo, CPO, used...) and not any physical "device" supplied by the owner.

2017 S100D No Acceleration above 85 MPH !

So I don't think Tesla is on the hoook because that software feature is a courtesy, not a legal obligation.