—
A lawsuit filed after a fatal 2023 Tesla crash into a fire truck alleges Autopilot caused the crash that killed the Model S driver, 31-year-old Giovanni Mendoza Martinez, of California.
Giovanni’s family filed the wrongful death lawsuit which contends the 2014 Tesla Model S Autopilot system caused Giovanni to crash head-on into the side of a fire truck that was parked across the highway.
The scene included two fire trucks and two California Highway Patrol vehicles with their emergency lights flashing.
The emergency vehicles were trying to block traffic due to a previous crash.
The Tesla Autopilot Fire Truck Crash
Giovanni purchased the used 2014 Tesla Model S in March 2021 because, according to the lawsuit, the car “would drive itself and he no longer needed to drive it.”
In February 2023, Giovanni was driving his 2014 Tesla Model S on Interstate 680 northbound at about 4 a.m. with his brother Caleb Mendoza riding in the front passenger seat.
The lawsuit admits Giovanni was not in control of the Tesla when the crash occurred.
“At the time of the collision, Giovanni was not controlling the Subject Vehicle, but he was instead passively sitting in the driver’s seat with the ‘Autopilot’ feature engaged.”
With the large 2016 Pierce Aerial ladder fire truck parked diagonally across two lanes and several emergency vehicles with their flashing lights activated, the Model S slammed into the side of the truck at about 70 mph. Data from the Model S show Autopilot had been engaged for about 12 minutes when the crash occurred.
Giovanni Martinez was killed, but his brother Caleb survived and is one of the plaintiffs in this Autopilot lawsuit.
According to the lawsuit, Tesla is to blame for the crash and fatality, but the lawsuit doesn’t mention why Giovanni didn’t see or react to the multitude of emergency vehicles with flashing lights.
Tesla Argues Fire Truck Crash Not Its Fault
The lawsuit alleges product liability claims because Tesla failed to equip the 2014 Model S with technologies to track a driver’s eyes to ensure the driver pays attention to the road and surroundings.
The plaintiffs also sued Tesla for misrepresentation and fraud alleging it intentionally misrepresented the capabilities of the 2014 Model S and concealed the advanced driver assistance features were different from a fully autonomous driving system.
But Tesla argues the case should be thrown out because the lawsuit “represents a deeply flawed attempt to take products liability and fraud law where it has never gone.”
According to the lawsuit, Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk made numerous statements which made Giovanni Martinez fully believe the Model S didn’t need a driver.
But Tesla says none of the statements “are affirmative statements about the 2014 Model S’s safety, technology, or its capabilities, and all of which are statements or predictions about the future of vehicle technology, which are not actionable.”
According to Tesla:
“While courts have found liability for misrepresenting past material facts, California law is clear that statements and predictions about future events are opinions that are not actionable. And no case should hold that predictions about the future possibilities of technology are actionable as predicates for fraud….”
The representation in question allegedly must be an affirmation of fact about a past or existing fact as opposed to an opinion. Tesla argues that otherwise, “nearly every discussion about the advancement of technology would give rise to liability for fraud. That cannot be the law.”
According to Tesla, the plaintiffs make allegations about vehicles manufactured after the 2014 Tesla Model S, all of which are allegedly irrelevant because those technological updates in hardware or software would not apply to 2014 Tesla Model S vehicles.
And Tesla also argues the lawsuit omits statements by Tesla about the specific capabilities of the 2014 Model S, “let alone any representations made by Tesla about the 2014 Model S that were allegedly obtained by Giovanni. Rather, most of the Complaint is hearsay about incidents involving other Tesla drivers and vehicles, which are legally irrelevant to the claims as pled.”
The lawsuit allegedly does not provide any representations specific to the driving capabilities of the 2014 Tesla Model S, let alone any representations about the vehicle that were knowingly false.
“The plaintiff must set forth what is false or misleading about a statement, and why it is false.” — Tesla
The Tesla fire truck crash lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California: Mendoza, et al., v. Tesla, Inc.
The plaintiffs are represented by Singleton Schreiber, LLP.