Tesla faces trial over woman pinned in garage
Tesla will face another test in Santa Clara County Superior Court this coming week over whether it is liable for a freak accident in which a toddler seemingly activated a parked vehicle, which accelerated toward the toddler’s pregnant mother, shattering her pelvis and leg.
The trial will start just days after Tesla settled a lawsuit brought forth by the family of former Apple engineer Walter Huang, who was killed in a solo vehicle crash while using the company’s autopilot software on a Silicon Valley freeway in 2018. This trial will differ from the Huang case, as it will not deal with Tesla’s driver assistance software.
Mallory Harcourt was 81⁄2 months pregnant when she was pinned in her garage by her new 2018 Tesla Model X.
According to a trial brief and a spokesperson for the family’s attorney, the accident occurred on Dec. 27, 2018, four days after the Harcourts purchased their Tesla. Harcourt and her 2-year-old son arrived at their Santa Barbara home and she parked her new Tesla outside of the garage and left the driver’s door open. Harcourt
decided to change her son’s diaper in the open garage because she didn’t have the keys to her home, but he somehow escaped her, according to the filing. He climbed into the Tesla’s driver’s floor well (where the car pedals are located) and “contacted” the brake pedal, which automatically closed the driver’s door and started the car, according to the filing. The toddler then made contact with the shift lever and the car began moving forward, the filing said.
Unable to exit the garage due to the Tesla obstructing her path, Harcourt placed herself in front of the vehicle, thinking it would recognize her and stop since she thought the vehicle had technology that would help it self-brake when something was in front of it, the filing said.
“She started waving her hands to help the car realize she was there,” the filing said.
Instead, the vehicle accelerated to over 8 mph, picked her up by her waist and crushed her against bicycles and other items located in the garage, pinning her there, the filing said. “The impact fractured Mallory’s pelvis in multiple places, fractured her fibula, and caused a deep puncture wound to her thigh.
After neighbors helped untrap Harcourt from her car, she was transported to a hospital, where she prematurely gave birth to her daughter almost a week later, despite the broken pelvis, according to the filing. As a result of the crash, Harcourt spent 11 days in the hospital and was unable to stand or walk without the assistance of a walker, according to the filing. She did not return to work for 42 days, the filing said. In total, her medical care for her injuries cost more than $73,000.
“Mallory’s injuries healed over time, but her pain is permanent. She continues to have pain multiple times per week,” the filing said. “Further, as Mallory ages and menopause sets in, her pain will increase due to the changes in her bones.”
The family is accusing Tesla of being liable for a defective product design.
“Under California law, if the Plaintiff elects to try the case under the consumer expectations test, she need not show the Model X was unreasonably dangerous — only that it was defective,” the filing said. “The test for whether the vehicle was defective rests on whether it performed as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect when used in a reasonably foreseeable manner.”
The Harcourt family is seeking compensation for trauma related to the crash. Harcourt is one of a slew of Tesla owners who have sued Tesla, alleging that its vehicles and technology led to severe injuries and even death.
The filing says the vehicle should not have accelerated because according to its owners manual, the car would not accelerate under certain conditions, including the following:
• The driver’s seat belt is unbuckled.
• The occupancy sensor in the driver’s seat does not detect an occupant.
• The driver’s door is opened.”
“Clearly the vehicle would be expected to remain in Park if at least two of these conditions are met,” the filing said.
The Harcourts bought the Model X because it was advertised as the “safest, quickest, most capable SUV ever,” according to the filing.
“Tesla claims its vehicles ‘are manufactured to be the safest cars in the world,” the filing said. “No reasonable consumer would expect any vehicle to be able to be started, shifted out of park and moved by a two-yearold.’
Attorneys for Tesla could not be immediately reached for comment on the case.