A federal judge has refused Tesla’s bid to overturn a $243 million jury verdict stemming from a fatal 2019 crash involving one of the company’s vehicles operating with Autopilot engaged.
In a decision made public Friday, Beth Bloom, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, ruled that the evidence presented at trial “more than supported” the jury’s findings and said Tesla failed to introduce any new arguments that would justify reversing the August 2025 verdict.
She added that Tesla’s positions “were already considered and rejected” and that the court did not find any error in the jury’s conclusions.
First Federal Fatal Autopilot Case to Reach Verdict
The case centers on an April 25, 2019 crash in Key Largo, Florida. George McGee was driving a 2019 Model S at approximately 62 mph (100 km/h) when he looked down to retrieve a dropped cellphone. The vehicle continued through an intersection and struck a parked SUV beside which Naibel Benavides Leon and her boyfriend Dillon Angulo were standing. Benavides Leon, 22, was killed. Angulo was severely injured.
Jurors ultimately found Tesla 33% responsible for the crash, with McGee bearing the remaining 67%. The jury awarded $19.5 million to Benavides Leon’s estate and $23.1 million to Angulo in compensatory damages, along with $200 million in punitive damages to be split between them. McGee previously reached a settlement with the plaintiffs.
The case marked the first federal wrongful death trial involving Tesla’s Autopilot system to reach a jury verdict — a milestone that many legal experts say could influence future litigation involving advanced driver-assistance systems.
Tesla Argued Driver Was Solely at Fault
In its effort to have the verdict set aside, Tesla argued that McGee’s distracted driving was the sole cause of the collision and that the Model S was not defective. The company contended that automakers “do not insure the world against harms caused by reckless drivers,” and maintained punitive damages should be zero because it did not exhibit “reckless disregard for human life” under Florida law.
Tesla has not publicly commented following Judge Bloom’s ruling, although the company is expected to appeal.
During the original three-week trial, plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that Autopilot detected the parked SUV and at least one pedestrian before impact but failed to respond appropriately. Tesla countered after the verdict that, “No car in 2019 — and none today — could have prevented this crash,” calling the outcome “wrong” and warning it could “jeopardize Tesla’s and the industry’s efforts to develop life-saving technology.”
What’s Next
With multiple Autopilot-related lawsuits still pending, this upheld verdict could shape how courts evaluate responsibility when driver-assistance systems are active — and how juries weigh the balance between human error and software performance.
