Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

Washington state lawsuit alleges that a 2023 Tesla Model X stopped at a red light accelerated on its own in June 2023, injuring the driver and a minor passenger, and that Tesla's Autopilot technology was responsible

A product-liability complaint against Tesla, filed in King County Superior Court in Washington in June 2026 and removed to federal court on 23 September 2026, alleges that on 29 June 2023 a 2023 Model X that its driver had brought to a stop at a red light accelerated on its own with extreme force, went through the light into the intersection and struck a curb, bursting its tires. The complaint, as reported by AboutLawsuits on 1 October 2026, alleges that Tesla's Autopilot technology acted without command, failed to respond to the red light and prevented the driver from braking or steering to safety. It says the driver was injured and that a minor passenger was injured and has needed treatment. The plaintiffs allege that Tesla knew of the danger and overstated the technology's capabilities, and they seek compensatory and punitive damages. These are the plaintiffs' allegations. The complaint does not say in terms that Autopilot was engaged at the light, and no response from Tesla to the allegations was found in the sources read.

AI system
Tesla Autopilot (reported)
Tesla
Occurred
29 Jun 2023
Reported
1 October 2026
Event location
United States
What the AI did
Relation unknown
Reported harm
Physical InjuryPsychological DistressFinancial Loss
Whose AI use
Their own AI use · Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Everyday life
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account
7 claims: 7 reported. 4 open questions
People reported harmed
2 people

AI system as recorded: Tesla Autopilot driver-assistance technology on a 2023 Model X, as named in the plaintiffs' complaint; the complaint does not state whether it was engaged when the vehicle accelerated

What Happened

The filing. AboutLawsuits reports that "A Washington man has filed a lawsuit alleging a defect in Tesla’s Autopilot system caused a crash that injured him" and a minor passenger. It says the complaint was brought "in the King County Superior Court of Washington on June 23, naming Tesla Inc. as the defendant", and that "The case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on September 23". The federal docket gives "Date Filed: Sept. 23, 2026".

The alleged event. According to the report of the complaint, the driver "was driving his 2023 Tesla Model X on June 29, 2023", and "he brought the Tesla to a stop at a red light when the vehicle accelerated with extreme force on its own". "It allegedly surged forward through the light and into the intersection at high speed", and the driver says he "was unable to stop or control the vehicle until it struck a curb and the tires burst".

The Autopilot allegations. The report says "The complaint alleges the Tesla’s Autopilot failed to keep" the occupants safe, "acted without command, and failed to respond to traffic conditions, including the red light", and that it prevented the driver "from braking and steering the vehicle to safety". The plaintiffs allege that Tesla "advertised the Autopilot technology in a way that greatly overestimated its capabilities and hid its deficiencies".

Alleged injuries and losses. The complaint, as reported, describes the driver "undergoing injuries to his left side from head to toe, including to his neck, back, shoulder and knees". A minor passenger was injured and, per the complaint, has needed treatment. The report says "Tesla paid to repair the vehicle, but the car lost value and the insurance premium increased because of the accident".

Relief sought. The lawsuit "seeks general, special, economic and punitive damages".

Limits. Every statement about the event comes from the plaintiffs' complaint, which a court has not tested. The complaint says the vehicle was equipped with Autopilot and that the driver relied on it to operate the vehicle, and it attributes the acceleration to the Autopilot technology; it does not state in terms that Autopilot was engaged while the vehicle was stopped at the light, and it also describes the event as sudden unintended acceleration. No answer or statement from Tesla on the allegations was found in the sources read. The family is not named in this record.

Reported harm

The complaint alleges that the driver suffered injuries to his neck, back, shoulder and knees, that a minor passenger was injured and has needed treatment, that both suffered shock and distress, and that the vehicle lost value and insurance premiums rose (plaintiffs' allegations, as reported by AboutLawsuits; not tested in court).

Outcome

Pending

AboutLawsuits reports that the complaint was filed in King County Superior Court on 23 June and removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on 23 September; the federal docket (No. 2:26-cv-03587) shows a filing date of 23 September 2026 and a notice of removal as its first entry. The lawsuit raises product-defect, design-defect, manufacturing-defect, failure-to-warn, warranty, negligent-misrepresentation and corporate-negligence claims and seeks general, special, economic and punitive damages. No ruling on the allegations is recorded.

What remains unknown

  • Whether Autopilot or any other driver-assistance feature was engaged when the vehicle accelerated; the complaint does not say so in terms.
  • What caused the acceleration; no vehicle data, investigation finding or expert analysis is in the sources read.
  • Tesla's response to the allegations.
  • The outcome of the case.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. Alleged by the plaintiffs: the complaint attributes the acceleration to Tesla's Autopilot technology. It does not state in terms that Autopilot was engaged when the vehicle was stopped at the light, and it also describes the event as sudden unintended acceleration. No vehicle data, finding or Tesla response on the point is in the sources read.

7 claims: 7 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported A Washington man sued Tesla in King County Superior Court in June 2026, alleging that a defect in Tesla's Autopilot system caused a crash that injured him and a minor passenger; the case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on 23 September 2026.

Causal attribution. Not applicable; this claim records the filing.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'A Washington man has filed a lawsuit alleging a defect in Tesla’s Autopilot system caused a crash that injured him'; 'in the King County Superior Court of Washington on June 23, naming Tesla Inc. as the defendant'; 'The case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on September 23'
  • courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'Date Filed: Sept. 23, 2026'
Reported The complaint alleges that on 29 June 2023 the driver's 2023 Tesla Model X, which he had stopped at a red light, accelerated on its own with extreme force through the light and into the intersection, and that he could not stop or control it until it struck a curb and its tires burst.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs' allegation.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'was driving his 2023 Tesla Model X on June 29, 2023'; 'he brought the Tesla to a stop at a red light when the vehicle accelerated with extreme force on its own'; 'It allegedly surged forward through the light and into the intersection at high speed'; 'was unable to stop or control the vehicle until it struck a curb and the tires burst'
Reported The complaint alleges that Tesla's Autopilot acted without command, failed to respond to the red light and prevented the driver from braking and steering the vehicle to safety.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs attribute the acceleration to the Autopilot technology; the complaint does not state in terms that it was engaged, and the allegation is untested.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'The complaint alleges the Tesla’s Autopilot failed to keep'; 'safe, acted without command, and failed to respond to traffic conditions, including the red light'; 'from braking and steering the vehicle to safety'
Reported The complaint alleges that the driver was injured on the left side of his body, including his neck, back, shoulder and knees, and received medical treatment and therapy.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs attribute the injuries to the acceleration event.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'undergoing injuries to his left side from head to toe, including to his neck, back, shoulder and knees'; 'Both family members underwent medical treatment and therapy'
Reported The complaint alleges that a minor passenger was injured and has needed treatment.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs attribute the injury to the acceleration event.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'responsible, in part, for the injuries to Mr.'; 'and his minor child, Defendant Tesla advertised the Autopilot technology'; 'Both family members underwent medical treatment and therapy'
Reported The complaint says Tesla paid to repair the vehicle and alleges that the vehicle lost value and the driver's insurance premiums increased.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs' allegation.

Reported The plaintiffs allege that Tesla knew the Autopilot technology was unreasonably dangerous and advertised it in a way that overstated its capabilities, and they seek general, special, economic and punitive damages.

Causal attribution. Plaintiffs' allegation.

  • aboutlawsuits.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'Despite having knowledge of the unreasonably dangerous nature of the Autopilot technology'; 'advertised the Autopilot technology in a way that greatly overestimated its capabilities and hid its deficiencies'; 'It seeks general, special, economic and punitive damages'

Sources

2 sources inspected, from 1 underlying account. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in English on 2026-10-05 in full. A legal-news report of the complaint; it names the plaintiffs, who are not named in this record. Its account was compared with the complaint itself (read in full, not cited). Applies to s1.

Read in English on 2026-10-05: docket page with entries 1 to 4 (notice of removal and attachments, 23 September 2026). The page shows no document text. Same proceeding as s1; not independent. Applies to s2.

Event countries: United States. Affected-person countries: United States. Court countries: United States.

AboutLawsuits describes the plaintiff as a Washington man who sued in King County Superior Court of Washington; the case is now in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The complaint places the event in King County, Washington.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-05: Published as a court complaint's allegations about a driver-assistance system, reported by a legal-news site and confirmed as a pending federal case by the docket. Every statement about the event is an untested allegation. The family is not named and the minor's circumstances are described only as far as the injury claim requires.

People described

The driver of a 2023 Tesla Model X, a Washington man, and a minor passenger in the vehicle

People reported harmed in this case

2 people

1 AI participant · 1 other person harmed

Two people: the driver and a minor passenger, both described in the complaint as injured (AboutLawsuits report of the complaint). The driver's spouse, who claims loss of consortium and was not in the vehicle, is not counted. Exact 2.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#tesla#autopilot#driver-assistance#sudden-acceleration#model-x#lawsuit#product-liability#washington#minor-passenger#allegations

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Washington state lawsuit alleges that a 2023 Tesla Model X stopped at a red light accelerated on its own in June 2023, injuring the driver and a minor passenger, and that Tesla's Autopilot technology was responsible. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2023-washington-tesla-model-x-sudden-acceleration-from-red-light-lawsuit-alleges-autopilot-defect

BibTeX

@misc{2023_washington_tesla_model_x_sudden_acceleration_from_red_light_lawsuit_alleges_autopilot_defect,
  title = {Washington state lawsuit alleges that a 2023 Tesla Model X stopped at a red light accelerated on its own in June 2023, injuring the driver and a minor passenger, and that Tesla's Autopilot technology was responsible},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2023-washington-tesla-model-x-sudden-acceleration-from-red-light-lawsuit-alleges-autopilot-defect}
}

Related cases

High Flock Safety license plate readers

Toledo, Ohio: police stopped a man's pickup at gunpoint in April 2024 after a Flock license-plate camera misread his plate as stolen, released a police dog that bit him, and charged him; prosecutors dropped the charges and he later settled a lawsuit for $35,000

On 11 April 2024 Toledo police officers stopped a pickup truck after a Flock license-plate camera alerted them to a stolen plate. According to the police report and body-camera footage reported by 13abc and ABC News, the camera had misread the plate, which was not stolen. Officers drew their guns, ordered the driver out and to the ground, and a K-9 handler released a police dog as he began to kneel. The driver told ABC News he was bitten seven times on his forearm and elbow, was traumatized and could not work; he was arrested and charged with obstruction, resisting arrest and, later, failure to comply. Prosecutors dropped all charges in August 2024. The department found the dog deployment within policy and reprimanded the officer who made the stop for failing to visually verify the plate against the reader's information. Business Insider reported in March 2026 that police records show the camera read a 7 on the plate as a 2, that the man lost feeling in his fingers, gave up his lawn-care business and forklift work, sold his truck and was evicted, and that he had sued the officer and the city and settled in October for $35,000.

Low Google AI Overviews (reported)

Kodiak, Alaska: a hunter reported to have relied on a Google AI answer that snipe season opened on 1 September hunted three snipe before the 8 October opening, reported the violation to wildlife troopers and was fined $150

Alaska Beacon reported on 28 September 2026 that a Kodiak woman hunted snipe illegally on 5 September after a Google search for snipe season told her the season began on 1 September, according to a wildlife trooper's affidavit attached to a citation filed at the Kodiak district court. The outlet describes the answer as a Google AI overview. She hunted three snipe, grew suspicious on learning that duck season did not open until 8 October, checked the regulations and called troopers to report herself. The outlet reports the trooper said he ran an identical Google search and received identical incorrect information. She pleaded no contest and was fined $150, and told the outlet she felt shame and embarrassment. A Department of Public Safety spokesman said it was the first time he thought the agency had seen AI cited, and that she had acted correctly once she learned of the mistake. Google did not respond to the outlet's request for comment.

Medium Unidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)

Hudsonville (Grand Rapids area), Michigan: a couple wired US$66,026.92 to scammers after a spoofed email and a phone call in what sounded like their loan officer's voice, which they and a fraud-prevention firm attribute to AI voice cloning

A married couple in their sixties buying a US$460,000 condo in Hudsonville, near Grand Rapids, Michigan, received an email on 19 May 2026, days before closing, telling them to wire US$66,026.92 for the down payment and closing costs within 24 hours. The email listed a phone number differing from their loan officer's by two digits, and the husband then received a call confirming the instructions in a voice that sounded just like the loan officer. The couple borrowed from family and other sources and wired the money. The day before closing their real loan officer sent the actual statement; the closing was cancelled hours before signing and the money was gone. The husband now believes the call came from a spoofed number using AI-assisted voice cloning; Tyler Adams of CertifID, which is working with the couple and federal officials, said someone's email in the transaction was probably compromised and that the scammers likely cloned the loan officer's voice from social-media clips. The sender's address had two extra letters ('UnitedsMortgages' instead of 'UnitedMortgage'). Neither the lender nor the loan officer is accused of complicity. The couple later completed the purchase in early June from their mutual fund, reported the loss to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center, and describe lasting apprehension and have discussed delaying retirement. CNN reported the case on 15 September 2026; the account the money went to has since closed.

Medium Unidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)

Bay Area, California: a mother reports wiring $5,400 to Mexico during a fake kidnapping call that used a voice the mother believed was the adult daughter's, which ABC7 reports scammers mimicked with AI

ABC7 (KGO-TV, 24 May 2026) and ABC News (a Good Morning America segment, 26 May 2026) reported that a Bay Area woman received a call from an unknown number in May 2026. The caller said the woman's adult daughter had been kidnapped by a Mexican drug cartel and played a voice the woman believed was the daughter's, in panic. The woman followed the caller's instructions for about five hours, feared for the daughter's life and wired $5,400 to Mexico. The woman then phoned the daughter, who said the daughter was at work, and realized the call was a scam. ABC7 states that scammers used artificial intelligence to mimic the daughter's voice, and ABC News describes AI as what the woman suspects was used. Neither outlet reports an analysis of the audio or a police finding about a cloned voice. An Operation Shamrock representative quoted by both outlets spoke of voice cloning in general terms and not about this call. ABC7 reports that Martinez police said they are investigating, and the woman said the money is not expected to be recovered. Both outlets rest on the woman's own account. The woman is described by role and the daughter is not named.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents