Tesla faces sanctions bid in California wrongful death lawsuit
Adds comment from plaintiff's lawyer in paragraphs 6, 7
By Mike Scarcella
Oct 28 (Reuters) -The estate of a man who was killed in 2021 after his Tesla crashed and caught fire has asked a federal judge in San Francisco to sanction the electric vehicle maker over stalled efforts to settle a wrongful death lawsuit.
Lawyers for the estate of Charles Leach said in a court filing on Friday night that Tesla violated a court order by failing to send a company official with settlement authority to a mediation hearing last month.
The estate's lawyers said they reached a deal to resolve the wrongful death lawsuit for a confidential amount, but they learned hours into the September hearing that Tesla’s designee, a products liability lawyer, could not approve a settlement agreement on his own.
Tesla's actions caused the parties to breach the settlement agreement, the lawyers said. The estate asked the court to award $9,600 in legal fees as a sanction against the Elon Musk-owned carmarker.
Tesla and its attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
An attorney for the estate, Todd Walburg, on Monday said to his knowledge the settlement was no longer on the table after a deadline passed.
"This is a just case, and a grieving widow who lost her husband in a Tesla crash deserves some closure rather than having the rug pulled out from under her after a mediation," Walburg said.
Tesla has denied any wrongdoing in the case, blaming the driver for the fatal crash. A jury trial is scheduled for July 2025.
The estate's lawsuit said Leach’s Tesla Model Y “suddenly” accelerated, went off the road and slammed into a pillar at an Ohio gas station. Leach, 72, died from blunt force trauma, burns and other injuries.
“Tesla was aware that its vehicles — including the Model Y — have reportedly on hundreds of occasions accelerated suddenly and without explanation,” the lawsuit said.
Tesla has responded that Leach was solely to blame for “improper and unsafe” operation of his 2021 vehicle. The company said Leach’s model “was state-of-the-art and was not defective in design or manufacture.”
Tesla has faced other lawsuits over crashes blamed on alleged defects in its electric vehicles. Tesla last year won the first trial over claims that its Autopilot driver assistant feature led to a death.
Tesla separately faces U.S. legal and regulatory scrutiny over its driver assistance systems. In December, Tesla recalled millions of vehicles to install new safeguards.
The case is Donna Leach v Tesla, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 3:23-cv-03378-SI.
For plaintiff: Todd Walburg and Scott Baez of McCune Law Group
For defendant: Sandra Ezell of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough
Read more:
US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software in 2.4 mln cars after fatal crash
Exclusive - Tesla Autopilot probe, US prosecutors focus on securities, wire fraud
Tesla settles case over fatal Autopilot crash of Apple engineer
Elon Musk defeats bid to be questioned in Tesla fatal crash lawsuit
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
