Tesla Inc. is under scrutiny in a Miami federal court concerning its Autopilot system following a deadly crash in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019.

The trial, which began on July 14, 2025, and is expected to last three weeks, investigates claims that Tesla’s driver-assistance system was defective and inadequately warned users about its limitations.

Mary “Missy” Cummings, an engineering professor at George Mason University and a former safety adviser for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), testified that Tesla had not used geo-fencing technology to limit Autopilot on unsuitable roads.

She also said that the owner’s manual, which contains important warnings, is not easily accessible to drivers. Cummings noted that Tesla was aware of drivers ignoring system alerts before the crash occurred.

The lawsuit is linked to a collision involving a Tesla Model S driven by George McGee.

The vehicle veered off a T-intersection and collided with a parked Chevrolet Tahoe, resulting in the death of Naibel Benavides Leon and serious injuries to Dillon Angulo, who were near the Tahoe.

Tesla asserts that driver error was the cause of the crash. The company claims that McGee was pressing the accelerator and overriding the vehicle’s adaptive cruise control.

🔗 Source: Bloomberg

🧠 Food for thought

1️⃣ Tesla’s Autopilot crashes show a pattern similar to the case on trial

The current Miami trial follows a documented pattern of similar Autopilot-related crashes dating back several years.

In March 2019, NTSB investigators confirmed that Autopilot was engaged just 10 seconds before a fatal Tesla Model 3 crash in Florida, where the vehicle struck a semi-trailer at 68 mph with no evasive action taken by either the driver or the system 1.

This incident echoed a nearly identical 2016 crash that also involved a Tesla colliding with a tractor-trailer while using Autopilot, raising questions about whether Tesla addressed known safety issues 2.

The NTSB has consistently expressed concerns about Autopilot’s design limitations, particularly regarding its inability to detect certain obstacles and its operation on roads it wasn’t designed for, which is an issue being contested in the current trial 3.

These repeated incidents may strengthen the plaintiff’s argument that Tesla was aware of specific Autopilot vulnerabilities but failed to implement sufficient safeguards.

2️⃣ Competing automakers chose different approaches to driver monitoring