by Stephen Rivers
- Woman claims Model Y’s defective handles trapped her after Virginia crash and fire.
- Tesla argues dismissal citing arbitration, compliance with federal law, jurisdiction.
- Automaker denies all claims, pointing to driver negligence and demanding jury trial.
Car crashes often spark questions about safety, but when they involve modern technology, they can also raise thorny debates about design and responsibilities. On December 9, 2023, a routine drive turned into a devastating accident for Susmita Maddi, who suffered burns and other injuries after her husband had a medical emergency and crashed their Model .
She later sued Tesla, with her attorneys arguing that the Model Y’s “door handles and locking system were defectively designed which prevented rescuers from extracting the occupants after an accident” and that “the warnings and instructions for the vehicle were inadequate”.
More: Crash Victim Trapped In Burning Tesla Sues Over Door Handles
Her attorneys also claim the car “was defective and unreasonably dangerous in that it was not adequately designed, manufactured, or marketed to minimize the risk of injury.” They further contend the vehicle was not crash-worthy and that the cabin “was not reasonably escapable or accessible” after the impact.
In this case, the legal team alleges that when the fire occurred, witnesses couldn’t open the door from the outside because of a defective door handle and lock.
Now, the automaker has responded and says that it shouldn’t even have to defend itself. The case rests on who should be responsible for educating customers about design details.
Legal Tangles in Texas
According to the court documents seen by Car Complaints, Tesla says that it shouldn’t be in court at all. In filings with the Travis County District Court in Austin, it pointed to the arbitration agreement the owners signed when they bought the car. It also argued that Texas law doesn’t impose a post-sale duty to warn customers of alleged defects, citing established case law.
As the company put it, “Texas courts have specifically held there is no post-sale duty to warn of, or to recall, an allegedly defective product.”
That word “allegedly” does a lot of heavy lifting here. If this were a confirmed defect, something that would result in a recall, Tesla and any other automaker would indeed be responsible for notifying owners. In this case, Elon Musk’s company argues that the Model Y complies with all state and federal safety standards. To that end, it’s seeking complete dismissal of the case and further believes that Virginia, the site of the crash, has a more significant legal interest in the matter.
Dispute Over Responsibility
Should the case continue, Tesla says it’ll take it to a jury because any injuries were due to factors outside of its control. “Tesla denies each and every material allegation contained in the Petition,” it wrote, adding that it “demands strict proof thereof, and to the extent such matters are questions of fact, says Plaintiff must prove such facts by a preponderance of the evidence to a jury.”
It’s worth noting that the Model Y does have a manual door release integrated into the armrest, so Maddi had the answer mere inches from the button that would normally pop the door open. That said, this is only one of several instances where electric door actuators have been blamed for serious injury or death. Lawsuits like this might be why Tesla is reportedly considering a redesign of its handles and why brands like Ford have had to recall cars with similar designs.