This post will give some insight as to why Musk continues to delay the rollout of Robotaxi and cybercab. The current lawsuits facing Tesla’s FSD will have adverse material, operational, financial, and reputational consequences not only for tsla
but for individuals dreaming of “easy” money by: 1. deploying their one and only primary vehicle into the robo fleet and 2. buying multiple cars to start some kind of autonomous business fleet of cars.
Currently, in the United States, there are 17 lawsuits against Tesla for FSD (have these lawsuits been disclosed in the 10K ?). 3 of the 17 complaints are contained herein. The majority of plaintiffs are third party victims, meaning people in other vehicles, motorcycles, or
pedestrians. Most of the plaintiffs were killed; however, some survived w/ catastrophic injuries, such as paralysis, traumatic brain, burn/thermal, internal, and crush injuries, and orthopedic trauma.
There is too much information to properly summarize each lawsuit in this post. I did post some interesting facts concerning each case, but I’ll let those with more law expertise and corporate compliance to comment & opine.
I linked all 3 lawsuit here for easy reference https://www.tesladeaths.com/in... The lawsuits will be available within the next 24 hours.
The owner’s of these teslas are listed as a defendant. This is significant because it demonstrates the vulnerability to liability people will expose themselves, their families, and assets to by using their personal car as a Robotaxi.
Let’s look at them more closely SASHA PELLETIER Plaintiff versus TESLA, LEONARD PAULO; JEREMY SKARR; ELON MUSK&DOES 2-50 Defendant
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. Strict Products Liability 2. Negligent Products Liability 3. Motor Vehicle Negligence 4. Negligence Misrepresentation 5. Fraudulent Misrepresentation 6. Concealment
Plaintiff was required to obtain medical services, treatment, and attendant care in an amount that has now exceeded $20,000,000 and to be determined by proof at trial.
Plaintiff will, in the future, be compelled to incur additional obligations for lifetime medical treatment and attendant care in an amount expected to equal or exceed those already incurred and to be determined by proof at trial.
Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer a lifetime loss of earnings in an amount to be determined at trial.
As a further direct & proximate result of the collision Plaintiff has incurred and in future will continue to incur, additional ascertainable, but as yet unknown, damages in amounts to be proven at trial.
Benjamin Maldonado Escudero Plaintiff versus Tesla, Romeo Lagman Yalung & Does 1–100 Defendants
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Strict Products Liability 2 Negligent Products Liability 3 Motor Vehicle Negligence 4 Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 5 Wrongful Death 6 Negligent Misrepresentation 7 Fraudulent Misrepresentation 8 Concealment
In September 2016, Musk—referencing Brown’’s fatal crash—publicly announced Tesla had fixed the issue that caused that crash in the latest version of its Autopilot software by increasing the system’'s reliance on radar so that it would see a large metal object across the road
Benjamin activated his right-hand blinker. After his right-hand blinker had signaled at least 10 times over a several-second span, Benjamin began to change lanes from the number 2 lane to the number 3 lane.
As he switched lanes, suddenly and without warning, his vehicle was rear-ended by Yalung’'s Tesla Model 3 (the Subject Vehicle).
The collision caused the Maldonados’ vehicle to roll over and crash into the center barrier wall of the freeway. Jovani was ejected from the vehicle when it rolled over. Jovani survived, at least momentarily,
but subsequently died from the injuries he sustained during the collision. Tesla continues to misrepresent the self-driving capabilities of its cars, motorists continue to die, and regulators have started investigating Tesla for fraud. Despite the numerous accidents, news reports
and investigations exposing the danger of Tesla’'s ADAS technology—including the incident that forms the basis of this case—Tesla continues its deceptive and misleading marketing practices concerning its ADAS technology in conscious disregard for the public’'s safety.
Caleb Mendoza Plaintiffs versus Tesla DOES 1-100 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. Strict Products Liability 2. Negligent Products Liability 3. Negligent Misrepresentation 4. Fraudulent Misrepresentation 5. Concealment 6. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 7. Wrongful Death
Giovanni died and Caleb was seriously injured when Giovanni bought a Tesla Model S with Autopilot from its prior owner and trusted it to drive—in reliance on Tesla’s misrepresentations.
Conclusion: a revolving door of litigation not only for Tesla, but for the Tesla owners dreaming of an AIRBNB & UBER business. The legal fees and damages will wipe out and bankrupt these DREAMERS and their families! GOOD LUCK 🍀👍
































































































