Cybertruck owner sues Tesla over FSD crash, claims keeping Elon Musk as CEO was negligent

[midian182]

What just happened? Tesla is no stranger to being sued, but this new case is a little different. The automaker is facing a $1 million lawsuit from an angry Cybertruck owner who says the vehicle tried to drive off an overpass while in Full Self-Driving (FSD) mode. She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO.

According to a court filing at Harris County District Court, plaintiff Justine Saint Amour bought a Cybertruck with the FSD package from a Florida dealership in February 2025.

As reported by Electrek, Saint Amour was driving the Cybertruck on the 69 Eastex Freeway in Houston with FSD engaged on August 18. The vehicle should have followed a right curve as it approached a Y-shaped overpass split near 256 Eastex Park and Ride. Instead, it attempted to drive straight ahead, directly into a concrete barrier at the edge of the overpass with the freeway below.

While Saint Amour disengaged FSD and grabbed the wheel, it was too late to avoid colliding with the obstacle.

We've seen plenty of Autopilot-related lawsuits filed against Tesla in the past, but this one has several allegations aimed specifically at Musk, including the claim that allowing him to participate in product design decisions was negligent.

Part of the suit alleges that Tesla engineers recommended incorporating radar and LiDAR sensors – used by self-driving competitors such as Waymo – into its vehicles to improve the safety of its self-driving system, but Musk rejected this in favor of using only cameras. Tesla started phasing out radar and ultrasonic sensors in its vehicles in 2021, transitioning entirely to a camera-only system. Allowing the CEO to override engineers shows negligence, Saint Amour claims.

Musk is described in the petition as "an aggressive and irresponsible salesman, who has a long history of making dangerous design choices, and over-promising the features of his products."

"The promotion of products, for capabilities they do not have, is the reason for this incident, and many others," the suit continued.

Last week, a judge upheld the $243 million jury verdict in a case involving a fatal 2019 Florida crash in which Autopilot was engaged. Lawyers for the plaintiffs claimed that Musk and Tesla made false statements to customers, shareholders, and the public about the safety capabilities of Autopilot, thereby increasing drivers' reliance on the system.

Tesla stopped using the term Autopilot in California last month rather than being subject to a 30-day suspension by the California DMV. The automaker has also changed the name of its Full Self-Driving feature to Full Self-Driving (supervised).

In 2024, a report from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) linked Tesla's Autopilot systems to nearly 1,000 crashes from the last few years, over two dozen of them fatal.

Permalink to story:

Cybertruck owner sues Tesla over FSD crash, claims keeping Elon Musk as CEO was negligent

 

[havok585]

"She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO. "

yea, that's totally irrelevant. She probably is into politics or a wannabe.

 

[Hotdog1n]

Tbh though if teslas did have radar and LiDAR sensors FSD would most likely be a lot better

 

[wiyosaya]

"She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO. "

yea, that's totally irrelevant. She probably is into politics or a wannabe.

IMO Musk is, at best, a salesman who pushes total BS. He is no engineer, regardless of his politics.

This isn't the only thing that has proven, through customer experience, specious about the Cyber****.

 

[DrSuess]

Not incorporating LiDAR was a cost cutting move, as expensive as the CyberTruck I don't think a couple thousands of dollars more would have affected its sales. A properly functioning LiDAR sensor would have prevented crashing in to a concrete barrier even on the sunniest day.

I'm surprised she didn't sue for more, everyone else sues for $10-$100 million, But I guess it will be easier and faster to negotiate an acceptable settlement with such a low amount.

 

[Beerfloat]

I have no thoughts on her claim but 'Saint Amour' is a badass name for a certain adult oriented industry.

 

[Liljonny11]

"She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO. "

yea, that's totally irrelevant. She probably is into politics or a wannabe.

Did you read this article? Musk directly influenced the technology for self driving and made it significantly worse, anyone in this field knows how bad camera are without Lidar/radar systems. He saved money on the cars by making the system less safe then proceeded to advertise it (yes he himself) as way safer than it actually was. Starting this article I thought the same thing, why even mention musk, he's pretty irrelevant but if he actually was the one to make the decision to make it less safe dismissing the opinion of his own engineers? That's negligent, and it's probably why we are hearing about the suit rather than a lawyer not even taking it.

 

[Puiu]

Did you read this article? Musk directly influenced the technology for self driving and made it significantly worse, anyone in this field knows how bad camera are without Lidar/radar systems. He saved money on the cars by making the system less safe then proceeded to advertise it (yes he himself) as way safer than it actually was. Starting this article I thought the same thing, why even mention musk, he's pretty irrelevant but if he actually was the one to make the decision to make it less safe dismissing the opinion of his own engineers? That's negligent, and it's probably why we are hearing about the suit rather than a lawyer not even taking it.

Don't worry, Tesla's subreddit has been telling me that this year is the year where FSD will get a magical AI update and that only "rules" and "regulations" are stopping Tesla from calling current FSD "level 4".
/s


Seriously though... these people are freaking delusional.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

"She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO. "

yea, that's totally irrelevant. She probably is into politics or a wannabe.

I dont think she would have bought a cybertruck if she into politics against Musk.

This sounds more about $$$ because Musk did directly alter the direction that FSD went into.

 

[Kashim]

"She also claims that Tesla was negligent in its hiring and retaining of Elon Musk as CEO. "

yea, that's totally irrelevant. She probably is into politics or a wannabe.

Sounds like YOU are the one into politics and also a Musk supporter. So your opinion is totally irrelevant.

 

[whateversa]

I've been saying it for years - Musk is a disaster and to some extent a fraudster. The original Tesla founders should never have allowed Musk to join and take over. He has repeatedly nearly destroyed the business. The only reason SpaceX is doing well is because Musk is simply not allowed (legally) to be the CEO. There are countless examples of how his shortcuts and cutting corners have been at the expense of customers and safety. I recall musk saying that one time when he went on holiday, other management tried to kick him out - everyone knows why by now. Tesla Solar has also been a disaster - their customers (victims) had to take Tesla to court because their Tesla systems kept burning down warehouses. There are other cases where people got a solar installation that did not work at all for months, and no one at Tesla solar knows what to do because all their staff were moved to Tesla motors because of another Musk screw up.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Tbh though if teslas did have radar and LiDAR sensors FSD would most likely be a lot better

Tesla's did have radar and ultrasonic sensors, and they were less safe. In fact it was having multiple types of sensors that was the issue because the input data between the two types couldn't be reconciled with each other. What the article fails to mention is that the time Tesla was successfully sued for $243M, they did have all sorts of other sensors in that vehicle. The crash happened in 2019, and the additional sensors were removed in 2021.

Instead, the software has advanced and is still advancing without the unnecessary sensors. It has gotten much safer in the meantime. And there are dozens of companies struggling to get self-driving cars working safely despite having full Lidar sensor suites. Some notable examples that shut down investments in the self-driving business entirely after spending billions include Uber and GM.

Separately, we don't have laser eyes and radar vision. How can we possibly drive safely without them? The issue with humans the vast majority of the time is distraction or not looking in all directions (not a problem for a computer). Anyways, FSD Supervised does still get into accidents (just like Waymo does) and it is not a legal problem. Tesla hasn't accepted liability for accidents, and thus it's on the driver to operate the vehicle safely and be ready to take over if it doesn't handle a situation correctly. The car even tells the driver to do so.

 

[Puiu]

Tesla's did have radar and ultrasonic sensors, and they were less safe. In fact it was having multiple types of sensors that was the issue because the input data between the two types couldn't be reconciled with each other. What the article fails to mention is that the time Tesla was successfully sued for $243M, they did have all sorts of other sensors in that vehicle. The crash happened in 2019, and the additional sensors were removed in 2021.

Instead, the software has advanced and is still advancing without the unnecessary sensors. It has gotten much safer in the meantime. And there are dozens of companies struggling to get self-driving cars working safely despite having full Lidar sensor suites. Some notable examples that shut down investments in the self-driving business entirely after spending billions include Uber and GM.

Separately, we don't have laser eyes and radar vision. How can we possibly drive safely without them? The issue with humans the vast majority of the time is distraction or not looking in all directions (not a problem for a computer). Anyways, FSD Supervised does still get into accidents (just like Waymo does) and it is not a legal problem. Tesla hasn't accepted liability for accidents, and thus it's on the driver to operate the vehicle safely and be ready to take over if it doesn't handle a situation correctly. The car even tells the driver to do so.

You are talking about things you have no idea about dude.

"having multiple types of sensors that was the issue" - it was NEVER an issue. having multiple sensors has been proven time and time again to be better.

"is still advancing without the unnecessary sensors" - it's at best at a standstill. every FSD update is worse than the last. it freaks out at tire marks, it cuts lanes like crazy and it has many issues.

"The crash happened in 2019" - it had absolutely nothing to do with the FSD sensors and even FSD itself. it was about autopilot (Autosteer), you know, the one that they stopped offering for free?

"we don't have laser eyes and radar vision. How can we possibly drive safely without them?" - the number of crashes every single minute disprove your "theory" and it's why everybody else is pushing for multiple sensors. and worse yet, you think that our vision works the same as a camera with an sloppy AI on top?

you want to maintain the status-quo or do you want self-driving cars to be safer? it seems we have our answer from how fervently you are defending Tesla with made up statements.

 

[Endymio]

Musk rejected [Lidar] in favor of using only cameras....Allowing the CEO to override engineers shows negligence, Saint Amour claims.

Human drivers operate without Lidar backup, nor is it evident Lidar would have helped in this situation. And it's the job of CEOs and upper management in general to make decisions that lower employees may disagree with.

While Tesla hasn't yet responded to this suit, investigations after most past suits have found the plaintiffs misrepresented the accident cause.

Some more facts omitted. The woman is a lawyer herself, and her damages are from "unspecified neck and shoulder pain", despite declining medical attention immediately after the crash. And this:

"Vehicles operating with Tesla Autopilot engaged recorded one crash for every 7.63 million miles driven....By comparison, Tesla reports one crash every 955,000 miles when its vehicles are driven without Autopilot and the U.S. national average is about one crash every 670,000 miles, according to federal data..."

A system ten times safer than humans can hardly be called "negligent".

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Separately, we don't have laser eyes and radar vision. How can we possibly drive safely without them? The issue with humans the vast majority of the time is distraction or not looking in all directions (not a problem for a computer).

There is the often promoted wrong idea that humans only use sight when driving. This is wrong because humans use multiple senses when driving - sight, sound, smell, and even feel.

When someone is too close to your car, you can beep them (sound). You can also hear cars passing by you.

When your car might have engine or tire issues or there is a fire in the distance, you can often smell it and might slow down/pull over.

When your car has driven over the grooved marks on certain roads, you can feel the vibrations and pull back to your road. When your car has issues, you can also sometimes feel odd vibrations.

 

[Endymio]

Elon Musk incorrectly promoted the wrong idea that humans only use sight when driving. This is wrong because humans use multiple senses when driving - sight, sound, smell, and even feel.

So your theory is this Cybertruck crashed because the vehicle couldn't smell, hear, or feel the upcoming overpass exit? Amazing Tesla didn't consider this obvious flaw!

When your car has driven over the grooved marks on certain roads, you can feel the vibrations ... When your car has issues, you can also sometimes feel odd vibrations.

Teslas do contain vibration sensors capable of detecting bad road conditions, and the vehicle's internal sensor network detects "car issues" much more accurately and extensively than a human's nose or buttocks can.