Parents Sue Tesla After Daughter, 19, Trapped in Burning Cybertruck, Door Design Lawsuit Explained
Three College Students Died in Piedmont Crash—Families Allege Electronic Doors Failed, Manual Releases Hidden Under Mats Made Escape Impossible
The parents of a 19-year-old college student killed in a Tesla Cybertruck crash have filed a lawsuit alleging a dangerous door design flaw trapped their daughter in the burning vehicle, preventing her escape and causing her death.
Krysta Tsukahara’s parents allege that Tesla knew about the flaw for years and could have moved fast to fix the problem but did not, leaving the 19-year-old arts student trapped amid flames and smoke that eventually killed her.
The three college students who died were 19-year-old Krysta Tsukahara and Soren Dixon, and 20-year-old Jack Nelson. The crash occurred on Thanksgiving Eve 2024 in Piedmont, California.
If a Cybertruck loses power during a crash, it can cause the electronic door mechanism to fail, according to the lawsuit, and the interior release is hidden and difficult to find.
This lawsuit comes just months after a Florida jury found Tesla liable to pay more than $240 million to victims of a 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped 2019 Model S.
If you own a Tesla, lost a loved one in a vehicle fire, or are concerned about automotive safety, here’s everything you need to know about this developing case and what it means for Tesla’s liability.
Table of Contents
What Happened: The Tragic Piedmont Cybertruck Crash
The Incident
The fatal Piedmont Tesla Cybertruck crash occurred last November (Thanksgiving Eve 2024).
Krysta Tsukahara was in the back of a Cybertruck when the driver who was drunk and had taken drugs smashed into a tree.
The vehicle burst into flames after the impact, and rescuers reportedly struggled to get the doors open as the fire intensified.
The Victims
Three young lives were lost in this tragedy:
Krysta Tsukahara, 19: An arts student whose family filed the lawsuit alleging the door design prevented her escape
Soren Dixon, 19: The driver of the vehicle
Jack Nelson, 20: Another passenger in the Cybertruck
All three were college students with their entire lives ahead of them.
What Makes This Case Unique
Post-crash investigations discovered that all three had been under the influence at the time of the crash.
However, the families’ lawsuits argue that regardless of how the crash occurred, Tesla’s defective door design turned what might have been a survivable crash into a death trap.
The core allegation: if the doors had been designed properly with accessible manual releases, the occupants could have escaped before the fire became fatal.
The Parents’ Allegations: What Design Flaw Trapped Her?
The Electronic Door System Failure
According to the lawsuit, Tesla’s electronic door system relies on a 12-volt battery that can fail during crashes, leaving occupants unable to open doors electronically.
When the Cybertruck crashed into the tree, the impact likely damaged the electrical system, causing the electronic door buttons to stop working.
With no exterior handles, the only way to open a Cybertruck’s doors is to press an electronic button on the pillars next to the doors—and the buttons may not work if the vehicle loses power.
The Hidden Manual Release Problem
While the Cybertruck does include manual door releases, the rear door releases are located under a rubber mat in the door.
This is the crux of the lawsuit: in a panic situation with smoke filling the cabin and flames spreading, passengers are unlikely to:
- Remember that manual releases exist
- Know where to find them
- Be able to access them under a mat in darkness and chaos
- Have the time to search for them before being overcome by smoke
The result, according to the twin lawsuits, was the agonizing and preventable death of their children.
Rescuers Couldn’t Open Doors Either
A rescuer at the scene reported that the car doors wouldn’t open, suggesting even people outside the vehicle struggled with the door mechanism during the emergency.
This indicates the door design creates problems not just for trapped occupants but also for first responders trying to save lives.
How Tesla Cybertruck Doors Work (And Why They’re Dangerous)
Normal Operation: Electronic Push Buttons
Tesla Cybertrucks don’t have traditional door handles.
Instead, you press an electronic button located on the door pillar (the frame between doors) to unlatch and open the door.
This works fine—when the vehicle has power.
When Power Fails: The Manual Release
Tesla’s manual door releases are designed to be used only in situations when Cybertruck has no power. When Cybertruck has power, use the interior door open buttons.
Front Doors: Have a more accessible manual release lever
Rear Doors: This is where the danger lies. The rear door releases are located under a rubber mat in the door.
You have to:
- Know a manual release exists
- Remember where it’s located
- Lift up the rubber mat on the door panel
- Find the hidden cable or lever
- Pull it hard enough to mechanically unlatch the door
In an emergency with smoke, fire, panic, and possibly injuries, this sequence of actions is nearly impossible.
Why This Design Is Problematic
No Visual Cues: The manual release is completely hidden—no bright color, no emergency labeling, no intuitive location
Requires Prior Knowledge: You need to have read the owner’s manual or been specifically trained
Time-Consuming: Searching under a mat while the cabin fills with smoke wastes critical seconds
Not Intuitive: In a panic, people don’t think to look under floor mats for an emergency release
Different from Other Cars: Standard vehicles have clearly visible door handles that work mechanically
This design flaw could prevent any child or passenger from knowing how to open the door or escape in an emergency. The absence of a clearly identifiable manual release mechanism for the rear doors creates a severe safety risk.
Tesla’s History with Door Safety Concerns
Bloomberg Investigation (September 2025)
A Bloomberg investigation documented that Tesla door handles won’t open without power, threatening rider safety.
This wasn’t the first warning about Tesla’s door design creating safety risks.
The Pattern: Electronic Door Systems Across Tesla Models
This isn’t just a Cybertruck problem—multiple Tesla models rely heavily on electronic door mechanisms with poorly designed manual backups.
Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y: All have electronic door systems with varying degrees of manual release accessibility
Common Complaints: Passengers and even some owners don’t know manual releases exist or how to use them
Emergency Situations: Fire departments and first responders have reported difficulty accessing Tesla vehicles after crashes
Previous Cases of Trapped Occupants
Tesla doors have been at the center of several crash cases because the battery powering the unlocking mechanism can be destroyed in a fire and the manual releases that override that system are difficult to find.
This suggests Tesla has received prior notice that their door design creates entrapment risks in fires and crashes.
Legal Basis: Product Liability and Wrongful Death Claims
What Is Product Liability?
Product liability law holds manufacturers responsible when defective products cause injury or death.
There are three types of product defects:
Design Defects: The product’s design is inherently dangerous (this is what the families are alleging about Cybertruck doors)
Manufacturing Defects: The product was designed safely but made incorrectly
Failure to Warn: The manufacturer didn’t adequately warn about risks
Design Defect: The Core Claim
The families are alleging a design defect—that Tesla’s door system is fundamentally unsafe because:
It relies on power that fails in crashes: Electronic systems that require electricity to unlock doors are vulnerable when batteries are damaged
The backup system is inadequate: Hidden manual releases under mats don’t provide reasonable emergency egress
A safer alternative exists: Traditional mechanical door handles that work regardless of power status
Tesla knew or should have known: Prior incidents and complaints gave Tesla notice of the danger
Wrongful Death Elements
To win a wrongful death lawsuit, the families must prove:
Duty of Care: Tesla owed a duty to design safe vehicles
Breach of Duty: The door design was defective and unreasonably dangerous
Causation: The defective door design directly caused or contributed to the deaths
Damages: The families suffered losses (loss of companionship, funeral expenses, pain and suffering)
Why the Drunk Driver Doesn’t Let Tesla Off the Hook
Even though the driver was intoxicated and caused the crash, Tesla can still be liable if:
- The defective door design made the outcome worse than it would have been
- The occupants would have survived the crash if they could have escaped
- The door defect was a substantial factor in causing the deaths
This is called “comparative negligence”—multiple parties can share responsibility.
The drunk driver’s actions don’t excuse Tesla’s alleged design defect.
Federal Safety Regulations and Automotive Door Standards
FMVSS 206: Door Locks and Retention Components
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 206 governs door locks and retention systems.
It requires:
- Doors must remain closed during crashes
- Locking systems must withstand specific force loads
- Doors must be openable from inside and outside
However, FMVSS 206 was written before electronic door systems became common and may not adequately address electronic failure scenarios.
NHTSA’s Role in Vehicle Safety
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigates vehicle defects and can order recalls.
Current Status: It’s unclear if NHTSA is investigating Cybertruck door safety, but these lawsuits may prompt an investigation.
Recall Authority: If NHTSA determines the door design creates an unreasonable safety risk, it can mandate a recall and design changes.
Gaps in Current Regulations
Current federal standards may not adequately address:
- Electronic door systems that fail when power is lost
- Manual release accessibility and discoverability requirements
- Emergency egress standards for electric vehicles
- Requirements for clearly labeled and intuitive manual overrides
This lawsuit could push regulators to update standards for the electric vehicle era.
Similar Cases: Occupants Trapped in Vehicle Fires
The Florida Tesla Autopilot Verdict ($243 Million)
In August 2025, a Florida jury found Tesla liable to pay more than $240 million to victims of a 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped 2019 Model S, finding that the company’s software contributed to the accident.
The jury ordered Tesla to pay $329 million to the family of a deceased woman and an injured survivor.
The jury awarded the plaintiffs $43 million in compensatory damages for pain and suffering plus $200 million in punitive damages, which are intended to deter future harmful behavior by Tesla.
The Tesla collision in Key Largo, Florida, killed 22-year-old Naibel Benavides and severely injured her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo.
This verdict demonstrates that juries are willing to hold Tesla accountable for safety defects and award substantial damages.
Other Vehicle Fire Entrapment Cases
Vehicle fire entrapment cases have resulted in significant verdicts against automakers when design defects prevented escape:
Ford Pinto Cases (1970s-1980s): Juries awarded millions when fuel tank design defects caused fires that trapped occupants
GM Fuel Tank Cases (1990s-2000s): Side-mounted fuel tanks in pickup trucks led to fire deaths and major settlements
Chrysler Jeep Cases (2010s): Rear-mounted fuel tanks in Jeeps caused fire deaths, resulting in recalls and settlements
The legal precedent is clear: automakers can be held liable when design choices trap occupants in burning vehicles.
Tesla’s Potential Defenses
Assumption of Risk
Tesla might argue that driving involves inherent risks and that passengers assumed those risks.
Likely to Fail: This defense rarely works when a specific design defect is alleged, especially one that passengers didn’t know about.
Intervening Cause (Drunk Driver)
Tesla will likely argue that the drunk driver’s actions were the sole cause of the deaths, not the door design.
Counter-Argument: The families can argue that even if the driver caused the crash, the door defect prevented escape and worsened the outcome.
Adequate Warning
Tesla might claim the owner’s manual adequately warns about and explains the manual door releases.
Counter-Argument: A buried warning in a manual doesn’t satisfy duty to warn when the danger is severe and the manual release design is non-intuitive.
State-of-the-Art Defense
Tesla could argue their door design represents current industry practices and technology.
Counter-Argument: Traditional mechanical door handles exist as a safer alternative, and Tesla chose the electronic system despite knowing crash risks.
Comparative Fault
Tesla will try to shift as much blame as possible to the drunk driver to reduce their liability percentage.
Impact: Even if successful, Tesla could still owe millions depending on their percentage of fault.
What Compensation Can the Families Seek?
Economic Damages
Funeral and Burial Expenses: Costs of laying their daughter to rest
Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased contributed financially to family
Medical Expenses: Any treatment before death
Loss of Inheritance: The financial contributions the deceased would have made over a lifetime
Non-Economic Damages
Loss of Companionship: The relationship between parents and their daughter
Pain and Suffering: Both the victim’s suffering and the family’s grief
Loss of Guidance and Counsel: The advice and support she would have provided
Emotional Distress: The ongoing trauma of losing a child in such a tragic manner
Punitive Damages
If the families can prove Tesla acted with reckless disregard for safety, they may seek punitive damages.
Purpose: To punish the defendant and deter similar conduct
Amounts: Can be substantial, as shown by the $200 million in punitive damages in the Florida Tesla case
Standard: Requires proof of conscious disregard for safety or intentional misconduct
Potential Value Range
Based on the Florida Tesla verdict and similar vehicle fire death cases:
Conservative Estimate: $5-15 million per victim Moderate Estimate: $15-50 million per victim High-End (with punitive damages): $50-100+ million per victim
The Florida case’s $243 million total for one death and one injury suggests substantial exposure for Tesla in this case involving three deaths.
Timeline: How Long Will This Lawsuit Take?
Investigation and Discovery Phase (12-24 Months)
What Happens:
- Both sides gather evidence
- Depositions of witnesses, engineers, and experts
- Document production (Tesla’s internal communications, design documents)
- Expert witness reports on door design and causation
Key Issues:
- Did Tesla know about door safety risks?
- What internal testing or complaints existed?
- Could the victims have escaped with proper door design?
Motion Practice (6-12 Months)
What Happens:
- Tesla will likely file motions to dismiss or limit claims
- Fighting over what evidence and expert testimony is admissible
- Possible summary judgment motions
Common Defense Motions:
- Motion to dismiss wrongful death claims
- Motion to exclude plaintiff’s experts
- Motion for summary judgment based on driver fault
Settlement Negotiations (Ongoing)
What Happens:
- Parties may engage in mediation or settlement discussions
- Most cases settle before trial
- The Florida $243 million verdict will influence settlement values
Factors Affecting Settlement:
- Strength of evidence against Tesla
- Public pressure and media attention
- Other similar cases pending or filed
- Tesla’s desire to avoid trial publicity
Trial (If No Settlement)
Timeline: Typically 2-4 years from filing Duration: 2-6 weeks for a complex product liability trial Jury Decision: Can result in significant verdicts as Florida case showed
Realistic Resolution Timeline
Best Case (Settlement): 18-36 months from filing Likely Scenario: 3-4 years from filing to trial or settlement Worst Case: 5+ years with appeals
What Tesla Has Said (Or Hasn’t Said)
Official Response to Lawsuit
Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the lawsuit.
This is typical for Tesla, which dismantled its PR department and rarely issues public statements about litigation.
Elon Musk’s Silence
Unlike some controversies where Elon Musk tweets responses, he has not publicly addressed this lawsuit.
His silence may be on advice of counsel, as anything he says could be used as evidence.
Tesla’s Owner’s Manual Defense
Tesla will likely point to its owner’s manual, which explains the manual door release location and operation.
However, courts have held that merely including information in a manual doesn’t satisfy duty to warn when a danger is severe and design alternatives exist.
What Should Tesla Cybertruck Owners Do?
Know Your Manual Releases
Front Doors: Locate the manual release lever and practice using it
Rear Doors: Find the manual release under the rubber mat and show all passengers where it is
Practice: Go through the motion so muscle memory can help in an emergency
Inform All Passengers
Before Driving: Show every passenger, especially rear seat occupants, how to manually open doors
For Children: This is especially critical—children need to know and practice
Regular Reminders: Review the procedure periodically
Consider Safety Modifications
Labels: Add your own bright emergency labels near manual releases
Glow-in-Dark Markers: Make manual releases visible in darkness or smoke
Written Instructions: Keep emergency door opening instructions visible in rear
Document Any Door Issues
Malfunctions: If electronic doors fail or are slow to respond, document with photos/video
Service Records: Keep records of any door-related repairs or complaints
Report to NHTSA: File a complaint at nhtsa.gov/vehicle-safety/vehicle-recalls if you experience door safety concerns
Join NHTSA Complaints
If you experience door malfunctions or safety concerns, report to NHTSA:
Why: Accumulation of complaints can trigger investigations and recalls
How: Visit nhtsa.gov and file a vehicle safety complaint
What to Include: Specific details about door failures, safety concerns, dates, circumstances
Should You Buy a Tesla Cybertruck?
Safety Concerns to Consider
The allegations in this lawsuit raise serious questions about Cybertruck safety:
Door Design: Electronic systems that fail in crashes with inadequate manual backups
Fire Risk: Any electric vehicle battery can ignite in severe crashes, but escape must be possible
Regulatory Gaps: Cybertruck may meet current standards but those standards may be inadequate
Unproven Track Record: Cybertruck is relatively new with limited long-term safety data
Tesla’s Overall Safety Record
NHTSA Ratings: Many Tesla models receive high crash test ratings
But: High crash test ratings don’t capture all real-world scenarios like fire escape
Autopilot Issues: The Florida verdict highlighted safety concerns with Tesla’s autonomous features
Quality Control: Tesla has faced criticism for quality control issues and rushed production
Alternative Vehicles
If door safety is a concern, consider:
Electric Trucks with Traditional Handles: Rivian R1T, Ford F-150 Lightning have mechanical door handles
Traditional Trucks: Gas-powered trucks with proven mechanical door systems
Other EVs: Electric vehicles from manufacturers with longer track records in safety systems
If You Still Want a Cybertruck
Understand the Risks: Make an informed decision knowing the alleged safety concerns
Train Everyone: Ensure all drivers and passengers know how to use manual releases
Stay Informed: Monitor this lawsuit and any NHTSA actions
Consider Waiting: See how this lawsuit and any investigations unfold before purchasing
Steps for Families Facing Similar Tragedies
Immediate Actions After a Vehicle Fire Death
Preserve Evidence: Don’t let the vehicle be scrapped—it’s crucial evidence
Document Everything: Photos of the scene, vehicle, and any visible damage
Medical Records: Obtain all medical examiner and autopsy reports
Police Reports: Get complete accident investigation reports
Witness Statements: Identify and contact anyone who saw the crash or rescue attempts
Consult a Product Liability Attorney
Timing: As soon as possible after the incident
Specialization Matters: Look for attorneys with experience in automotive defect cases
Resources Needed: Product liability cases against major automakers require significant resources
Contingency Fees: Most attorneys work on contingency (no fee unless you win)
Preserve Your Rights
Statutes of Limitations: Vary by state but typically 2-4 years from death
Spoliation: Don’t allow evidence to be destroyed or altered
Insurance: Be careful what you say to insurance adjusters—consult an attorney first
Social Media: Avoid posting about the case, as posts can be used against you
What to Look for in an Attorney
Experience: Track record with automotive product liability cases
Resources: Ability to hire top expert witnesses and conduct extensive investigation
Results: History of substantial verdicts or settlements against automakers
Compassion: Someone who treats your loss with the respect and dignity it deserves
The Broader Implications for Automotive Safety
Could This Change Vehicle Design Standards?
This lawsuit and others like it may push:
Federal Regulation Updates: NHTSA may update standards to address electronic door system failures
Industry-Wide Changes: Other automakers may reconsider electronic door systems
Warning Label Requirements: Clearer, more prominent warnings about manual release locations
Design Standards: Requirements for intuitive, easy-to-find manual overrides
The Electric Vehicle Safety Question
As EVs become more common, safety standards must evolve:
Battery Fire Risks: High-voltage batteries present unique fire dangers
Electronic System Dependencies: More vehicle functions rely on electrical systems that can fail
Emergency Egress: Special attention needed to ensure occupants can always escape
First Responder Training: Fire departments need training on EV-specific rescue challenges
Tesla’s Liability Exposure
With the Florida $243 million verdict and now these Cybertruck lawsuits:
Financial Impact: Tesla faces potentially hundreds of millions in liability
Reputation Damage: Safety concerns could affect sales and brand perception
Regulatory Scrutiny: NHTSA may increase oversight of Tesla vehicles
Design Changes: Tesla may be forced to redesign door systems across model lines
Frequently Asked Questions
What design flaw trapped the woman in the burning Tesla?
The lawsuit alleges that Tesla Cybertrucks use electronic door latches that fail when power is lost in a crash. While manual releases exist, the rear door releases are hidden under rubber mats, making them nearly impossible to find in an emergency with smoke and fire.
Can you sue Tesla for a defective car design?
Yes. Product liability law allows victims to sue manufacturers when defective designs cause injury or death. The families are pursuing wrongful death claims based on alleged design defects in the Cybertruck door system.
How do Tesla Cybertruck doors work?
Cybertruck doors use electronic push buttons on the door pillars instead of traditional handles. When power is available, you press a button to unlatch the door. If power fails, there are manual cable releases, but the rear door releases are hidden under rubber mats in the door panels.
Has anyone else been trapped in a Tesla fire?
Yes. Tesla doors have been at the center of several crash cases because batteries can be destroyed in fires and manual releases are difficult to find. This lawsuit is part of a broader pattern of concerns about Tesla door designs in emergency situations.
What is a product liability lawsuit against a car company?
Product liability lawsuits hold manufacturers responsible when defective products cause harm. For vehicles, this includes design defects (unsafe design choices), manufacturing defects (assembly errors), or failure to warn (inadequate safety warnings).
How much can you sue for wrongful death in a car defect case?
Compensation varies widely based on the circumstances. In August 2025, a Florida jury awarded over $240 million in a Tesla wrongful death case. Damages can include economic losses, pain and suffering, loss of companionship, and potentially punitive damages.
Are Tesla Cybertrucks safe?
That’s what this lawsuit challenges. While Cybertrucks may meet current federal safety standards, the allegations raise questions about whether the door design creates unreasonable escape risks in crashes involving fire or power loss.
What should I do if I own a Tesla with this door design?
Learn where all manual door releases are located, practice using them, show all passengers (especially children) how to use them, consider adding your own emergency labels, and report any door malfunctions to NHTSA at nhtsa.gov.
How long does it take to settle a lawsuit against Tesla?
Complex product liability lawsuits against major automakers typically take 2-4 years to reach settlement or trial. The Florida Tesla case that resulted in a $243 million verdict involved a 2019 crash with the verdict coming in August 2025—about 6 years.
What evidence proves a car design defect?
Evidence includes: expert testimony from automotive engineers, internal company documents showing knowledge of risks, crash investigation reports, witness testimony, comparable incident data, testing results, and proof that safer design alternatives exist.
Can I join the lawsuit against Tesla for door defects?
This lawsuit is specific to the victims of the Piedmont crash. However, if you or a loved one were injured or killed due to Tesla door design defects, you may have grounds for your own lawsuit. Consult a product liability attorney.
Has Tesla recalled Cybertrucks for door problems?
As of October 2025, there is no NHTSA-ordered recall specifically for Cybertruck door safety issues, though this lawsuit may prompt regulatory investigation. Check nhtsa.gov/recalls for current recall information.
What are my rights if a car defect killed my family member?
You have the right to pursue a wrongful death claim against the manufacturer, seeking compensation for your loss. Consult with a product liability attorney who specializes in automotive defect cases. Statutes of limitations apply, so don’t delay.
Do I need a lawyer to sue an automaker for wrongful death?
Yes. Product liability cases against major automakers are extremely complex, require substantial resources for expert witnesses and investigation, and benefit greatly from experienced legal representation. Most product liability attorneys work on contingency.
Key Takeaways
This tragic case highlights critical safety concerns and legal issues:
Three Young Lives Lost: Krysta Tsukahara, Soren Dixon, and Jack Nelson, all college students, died in a Thanksgiving Eve 2024 Cybertruck crash in Piedmont, California.
Core Allegation: Tesla’s electronic door system fails when power is lost in crashes, and manual releases hidden under rubber mats are nearly impossible to find in emergencies.
Tesla Knew: The lawsuit alleges Tesla had knowledge of door safety concerns for years but failed to address them adequately.
Legal Precedent: The August 2025 Florida verdict awarding $243 million against Tesla in another wrongful death case shows juries will hold Tesla accountable.
Federal Standards May Be Inadequate: Current vehicle safety regulations may not adequately address electronic door system failures in the EV era.
Multiple Families Affected: This lawsuit involves families of three victims, potentially tripling Tesla’s liability exposure.
Cybertruck Owners Should Act: Learn manual release locations, train all passengers, and report any door malfunctions to NHTSA.
Long Legal Battle Ahead: Expect 2-4 years before this case reaches settlement or trial.
Broader Implications: This case could force design changes across Tesla’s model lineup and industry-wide safety standard updates.
Preventable Tragedy: The families’ core claim is that proper door design with accessible manual releases could have saved their children’s lives.
Resources and Next Steps
Government Resources
- NHTSA Vehicle Safety Complaints: nhtsa.gov/vehicle-safety/vehicle-recalls
- NHTSA Recall Information: nhtsa.gov/recalls
- Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/fmvss
- Report a Safety Problem: nhtsa.gov/report-a-safety-problem
Tesla Resources
- Tesla Cybertruck Owner’s Manual: tesla.com/ownersmanual/cybertruck
- Tesla Safety Information: tesla.com/safety
- Tesla Customer Support: tesla.com/support
Legal Help
- American Bar Association Lawyer Referral: americanbar.org/groups/legal_services/flh-home
- Product Liability Attorneys: Search for attorneys specializing in automotive defect cases
- State Bar Associations: Find your state bar for attorney referrals
Consumer Protection
- Consumer Product Safety Commission: cpsc.gov
- Center for Auto Safety: autosafety.org
- Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety: carconsumers.org
Support for Grieving Families
- The Compassionate Friends: compassionatefriends.org (support for families after child loss)
- National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children: pomc.org
- Grief Counseling Resources: Contact local victim services or hospice organizations
Monitoring This Case
- Court Filings: Check Alameda County Superior Court records
- Legal News: Follow law360.com and other legal publications
- Consumer Advocacy: autosafety.org tracks automotive safety litigation
Disclaimer: This article provides information about ongoing litigation and should not be considered legal advice. Every case is unique and fact-specific. If you or a loved one has been affected by a vehicle defect, consult with a qualified product liability attorney in your state. Statutes of limitations apply—don’t delay seeking legal guidance. Information is current as of October 2025 but may change as the litigation proceeds. The allegations in the lawsuit have not been proven in court, and Tesla has not admitted liability.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah