News
Tesla argues human error caused fatal 2019 crash, not Autopilot: report
Tesla now faces the jury’s verdict in a trial alleging that Autopilot caused a fatality, and the trial is expected to set a precedent for future cases surrounding advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). During closing arguments on Tuesday, an attorney for the plaintiffs pointed to an analysis Tesla conducted two years before the accident, claiming that the automaker knowingly sold the Model 3 with a safety issue related to its steering.
The trial began in California late last month after a 2019 incident in which 37-year-old Micah Lee veered off a highway outside Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour, suddenly striking a palm tree before the vehicle burst into flames. According to court documents, the crash killed Lee and injured both of his passengers, one of whom was an 8-year-old boy.
Lee’s passengers and estate initiated a civil lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that the company knew that Autopilot and its other safety systems were defective when it sold the Model 3.
Tesla has denied any liability in the accident, claiming that Lee had consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel and saying it could not detect if Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash.
This and other trials come as regulatory requirements for ADAS suites are just emerging, and the cases are expected to help navigate future court cases related to accidents with the systems.
According to Reuters, the attorney for the plaintiffs, Jonathan Michaels, showed the jury an internal safety analysis from Tesla in 2017 during closing arguments, in which employees identified “incorrect steering command” as a potential safety issue. Michaels said the issue involved an “excessive” steering wheel angle, arguing that Tesla was aware of related safety problems before selling the Model 3.
“They predicted this was going to happen. They knew about it. They named it,” Michaels said.
Michaels also said that Tesla created a specific protocol to deal with affected customers and that the company instructed workers to avoid accepting liability for the issue. Michaels also echoed prior arguments, saying that Tesla knew it was releasing Autopilot in an experimental state, though it needed to do so to boost market share.
“They had no regard for the loss of life,” Michaels added.
Michael Carey, Tesla’s attorney, said that the 2017 analysis wasn’t meant to identify the defect but instead was meant to help avoid any potential safety issues that could theoretically occur. Carey also said that Tesla developed a system to prevent Autopilot from making the same turn that had caused the crash.
Carey said that the subsequent development of the safety system “is a brick wall standing in the way of plaintiffs’ claim,” adding that there haven’t been any other cases where a Tesla has maneuvered the way that Lee’s did.
Instead, Carey argued to the jury that the crash’s simplest explanation was human error, asking jurors to avoid awarding damages on behalf of the severe injuries encountered by the victims.
“Empathy is a real thing, we’re not saying its not,” Carey argued. “But it does not make cars defective.”
Earlier this month, a federal judge in California ruled in Tesla’s favor in a similar case looking at whether the automaker misled consumers about its Autopilot system’s capabilities. In that case, which had the chance to become a class-action lawsuit, the judge ruled that most of the involved plaintiffs had signed an arbitration clause when purchasing the vehicle, requiring the claims to be settled outside of court.
The cases are expected to set precedents in court for future trials involving Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems and the degree of the automaker’s responsibility in accidents related to their engagement. Tesla is also facing additional information requests from the U.S. Department of Justice related to its Autopilot and FSD beta.
Tesla has received more requests regarding Autopilot and FSD from DOJ
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
Tesla scores major court win as judge rejects race bias class action
The ruling means the 2017 lawsuit cannot proceed as a class action because plaintiff attorneys were unable to secure testimony commitments from at least 200 workers.
Tesla scored a significant legal victory in California after a state judge reversed a class certification in a high-profile race harassment case involving 6,000 Black workers at its Fremont plant. The ruling means the 2017 lawsuit cannot proceed as a class action because plaintiff attorneys were unable to secure testimony commitments from at least 200 workers ahead of a 2026 trial, a threshold the judge viewed as necessary to reliably represent the full group.
No class action
In a late-Friday order, California Superior Court Judge Peter Borkon concluded that the suit could not remain a class action, stating he could not confidently apply the experiences of a much smaller group of testifying workers to thousands of potential class members. His ruling reverses a 2024 decision by a different judge who had certified the case under the belief that a trial of that size would be manageable, as noted in a Reuters report.
The lawsuit was originally filed by former assembly-line worker Marcus Vaughn, who alleged that Black employees at Tesla’s Fremont factory were exposed to various forms of racially hostile conduct, including slurs, graffiti, and instances of disturbing objects appearing in work areas. Tesla has previously said it does not tolerate harassment and has removed employees found responsible for misconduct. Neither Tesla nor the plaintiffs’ legal team immediately commented on the latest ruling.
Tesla’s legal challenges
While the decertification narrows the scope of this particular case, Tesla still faces additional litigation over similar allegations. A separate trial involving related claims brought by a California state civil rights agency is scheduled just two months after the now-vacated class trial date. The company is also contending with federal race discrimination claims filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alongside several individual lawsuits it has already resolved.
For now, the reversal removes the large-scale exposure Tesla would have faced in a unified class trial, shifting the dispute back to individual claims rather than a single mass action. The case is Vaughn v. Tesla, filed in Alameda County Superior Court.
@teslarati With a pedestrian in the crosswalk, Tesla Full Self-Driving shows off its courtesy. Human drivers? Not so much. #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ AMERICAN HEART – Maxwell Luke
News
Tesla Holiday Update is incoming, and the wishlist is Merry and Bright
There are a handful of big wishes, and we’ve seen a lot of different requests out there based on what owners are saying on social media. Nevertheless, what Tesla should bring and what Tesla will bring are two different things.
Tesla’s Holiday Update is going to be on its way soon, and although we have no idea what the company is planning to implement into vehicles with the 2025 iteration.
However, the wishlist is extensive, and owners are hoping to get a vast array of new features, both useful and artificial. That’s the fun thing about owning a Tesla — not everything is necessary, and it’s okay for your car to be fun.
There are a handful of big wishes, and we’ve seen a lot of different requests out there based on what owners are saying on social media. Nevertheless, what Tesla should bring and what Tesla will bring are two different things.
🚨 All I Want for Christmas (in the Tesla Holiday Update) is:
1. More streaming platforms
2. Summon for Cybertruck
3. Easier Navigation adjustment for a preferred route instead of the optimal choiceWhat else? pic.twitter.com/qapS1jXAuB
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 16, 2025
In past years, Tesla has brought both useful things and fun things with the Holiday Update. The Custom Lock Sound, new Light Shows, and even High Fidelity Park Assist have all come in past updates, among many other things. But for 2025, people want even more, and here’s what we have seen most frequently thus far:
More Streaming Platforms
This is a personal request of ours, and it’s something that we feel is long overdue.
Sure, Netflix, Disney+, and Hulu are all great — but there’s a lot of meat left on that bone. HBOMax, Paramount+, and even YouTube TV would be a great option for those of us who have subscriptions and want to watch Live Events while Supercharging or eating in our cars.
The fact that Tesla has not added more platforms to its in-car Theater in a few years has been, dare I say, disappointing?
Full Self-Driving for Europe
This is something not even Santa can help with. Although his Elves are known for their high productivity, we’re not even sure they could convince European regulators to open the door for FSD’s entrance into the market.
Tesla deploys Unsupervised FSD in Europe for the first time—with a twist
FSD is definitely capable of handling European driving conditions, but regulators are truly dragging their feet through the mud with the approval process. Tesla has tested FSD in several countries in Europe, but nothing has been set in stone yet.
Deeper Grok Integration
Many owners have said something about how Grok is truly not super in-tune with the vehicles. This is something any owner will experience.
It seems Grok should be capable of handling all in-car requests; everything from changing the A/C to a specific temperature to adding a stop within the Navigation should be handled by Grok.
Instead, Grok cannot handle those things currently. You have to speak to the car itself using the microphone button on the steering wheel.
Interestingly, some vehicles already have the Grok logo replacing the microphone. It is likely the most realistic request of all.
‘Learn’ Mode for Full Self-Driving Arrival Options
Although it is great for public destinations, FSD still does not allow you to choose a set parking spot at your residence. It also does not allow you to choose preferences for parking in large parking lots.
Renters, and even those who live in purchased townhomes, often have assigned parking spots. Full Self-Driving v14 has done a great job of doing half the work, but there have been too many times when I’ve arrived home, the car pulls me into a spot, and I’m forced to manually back out and park in my assigned space.
Many people also do not like to park toward the entrance of a store, me included. Parking away from the front of a store eliminates parking congestion and usually is a safer bet for your vehicle to keep from being dinged by careless drivers who swing their doors open.
Navigation Adjustments
Sometimes you don’t want to turn left on the street the navigation chooses. Maybe you want to go a block down and check out that new Portuguese restaurant that just opened on the way to your next destination.
This is only possible currently by inputting a waypoint that would take you that way. Instead, the center screen could be opened, and the driver should be able to select an alternative route by simply touching a street they’d rather travel on.
Investor's Corner
Tesla wins $508 price target from Stifel as Robotaxi rollout gains speed
The firm cited meaningful progress in Tesla’s robotaxi roadmap, ongoing Full Self-Driving enhancements, and the company’s long-term growth initiatives.
Tesla received another round of bullish analyst updates this week, led by Stifel, raising its price target to $508 from $483 while reaffirming a “Buy” rating. The firm cited meaningful progress in Tesla’s robotaxi roadmap, ongoing Full Self-Driving enhancements, and the company’s long-term growth initiatives.
Robotaxi rollout, FSD updates, and new affordable cars
Stifel expects Tesla’s robotaxi fleet to expand into 8–10 major metropolitan areas by the end of 2025, including Austin, where early deployments without safety drivers are targeted before year-end. Additional markets under evaluation include Nevada, Florida, and Arizona, as noted in an Investing.com report. The firm also highlighted strong early performance for FSD Version 14, with upcoming releases adding new “reasoning capabilities” designed to improve complex decision-making using full 360-degree vision.
Tesla has also taken steps to offset the loss of U.S. EV tax credits by launching the Model Y Standard and Model 3 Standard at $39,990 and $36,990, Stifel noted. Both vehicles deliver more than 300 miles of range and are positioned to sustain demand despite shifting incentives. Stifel raised its EBITDA forecasts to $14.9 billion for 2025 and $19.5 billion for 2026, assigning partial valuation weightings to Tesla’s FSD, robotaxi, and Optimus initiatives.
TD Cowen also places an optimistic price target
TD Cowen reiterated its Buy rating with a $509 price target after a research tour of Giga Texas, citing production scale and operational execution as key strengths. The firm posted its optimistic price target following a recent Mobility Bus tour in Austin. The tour included a visit to Giga Texas, which offered fresh insights into the company’s operations and prospects.
Additional analyst movements include Truist Securities maintaining its Hold rating following shareholder approval of Elon Musk’s compensation plan, viewing the vote as reducing leadership uncertainty.
@teslarati Tesla Full Self-Driving yields for pedestrians while human drivers do not…the future is here! #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ 2 Little 2 Late – Levi & Mario
-
News2 weeks agoTesla shares rare peek at Semi factory’s interior
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla says texting and driving capability is coming ‘in a month or two’
-
News1 week agoTesla makes online ordering even easier
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance set for new market entrance in Q1
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Cybercab production starts Q2 2026, Elon Musk confirms
-
News1 week agoTesla is launching a crazy new Rental program with cheap daily rates
-
News2 weeks agoTesla China expecting full FSD approval in Q1 2026: Elon Musk
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Model Y Performance is rapidly moving toward customer deliveries
