Imagine sitting at a red light when suddenly and without warning, your car accelerates on its own. In fact, it does so at such a pace that it “bursts” its own tires and then fights back when you attempt to take control. That’s what one family in Washington alleges happened with their Tesla Model X. The incident is at the heart of a new lawsuit, and only data from the car may be able to prove or disprove the claim.

As KING 5 reports, Linh Nguyen was stopped at the intersection of 144th Street Northeast and 124th Avenue Northeast in Kirkland on June 29, 2023. His then-14-year-old daughter was riding with him. The complaint alleges that their 2023 Model X suddenly accelerated into the intersection, then struck a curb. Thankfully, no other vehicle was hit.

Read: Another Tesla Crash, Another Owner Says It ‘Drove On Its Own’

According to Nguyen, he sustained injuries to his neck, back, shoulder, knees, and left side, while suffering from dizziness and confusion. The complaint says his daughter was injured too, and suffered severe emotional distress. The family is seeking damages from Tesla, including compensation for medical treatment and other losses.

The lawsuit points to Autopilot, alleging the system failed to keep the SUV stopped, accelerated without Nguyen’s input, and prevented him from regaining control by braking or steering.

Nguyen also says he paid roughly $15,000 extra for the technology, which brings up another question. Tesla has never required that type of payment for Autopilot. On the other hand, it has indeed priced its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) tech suite at that figure. So to that end, we’re left wondering what system Nguyen alleges created the crash. That said, the allegations here aren’t without precedent.

More: Tesla’s Self-Driving Feature Just Became A Monthly Bill For Everyone

After investigating a fatal 2018 Model X crash in California, the NTSB concluded that Autopilot steered the SUV into a highway gore area. The board also cited the driver’s failure to respond. Obviously, swerving into a lane while moving is quite different from what sounds like a car attempting its own 0-60 test without warning. That’s where the vehicle logs and event data could prove either vindicating or damning.

The public account doesn’t include data like accelerator position, brake application, speed, steering input, and the status of its assistance systems. Each of those would say a lot about what went down.

In an earlier review of Tesla sudden-acceleration complaints, NHTSA analyzed crash data from 118 incidents. It found that the crashes for which event data was available were caused by pedal misapplication, with no evidence of a vehicle fault or ineffective brakes in those cases. Until the data comes out, plenty of folks could assume this is another similar case.

Photos: Tesla

A trial involving Tesla has just started in California, some four years after the electric car manufacturer was sued by the California Civil Rights Department for allegedly allowing racial discrimination against black workers at its Fremont factory.

Rather than a typical jury trial, state Superior Court Judge Peter Borkon ordered a bench trial. This means that he alone will determine if Tesla violated local civil rights laws, rather than a jury made up of members of the public.

Read: Tesla Settles Potentially Costly Lawsuit Over Autopilot Death

The lawsuit, filed in February 2022, asserted that Black workers at the company’s site in Fremont, California, have been segregated to the lowest level of the workforce and “discriminated against in job assignments, discipline, pay, and promotion.” It has also been alleged that Tesla has turned a blind eye to years of complaints from Black workers who’ve had to endure racial slurs and seen racist writing and graffiti in common areas, including swastikas and other hate symbols.

The director of the California Civil Rights Department says the agency wants to hold Tesla accountable. Tesla has vehemently denied the accusations and, in late 2022, countersued the agency, alleging it had violated laws by filing the suit without seeking public comment or giving the car manufacturer time to settle.

California does not have a cap on the damages that a court can award to workers affected by workplace discrimination, so if Judge Borkon rules for the plaintiffs, Tesla may be forced to cough up a serious amount of money.

This isn’t the only lawsuit that Tesla is dealing with, related to the Fremont factory. In 2023, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Tesla in federal court, also alleging that starting in 2015, Black employees had been subjected to racial slurs. This separate lawsuit also claims Tesla has failed to investigate complaints of racial conduct and even fired or retaliated against those workers who reported being harassed.

Lawsuits that turn into jury trials can be costly, and likely to avoid a potentially astronomical payout, Tesla has settled a lawsuit filed in relation to the death of a 31-year-old killed while driving a Model S with Autopilot enabled. As you may expect, details about the settlement remain confidential.

On February 18, 2023, Genesis Giovanni Mendoza Martinez was driving his 2014 Tesla Model S on Interstate 680 in Contra Costa County, California, when the EV slammed into a fire truck responding to an earlier accident. Martinez was killed in the 70-mph crash, while his brother in the passenger seat suffered serious injuries.

Read: NHTSA Suspects Tesla That Hit Firetruck In Fatal Crash Was Using Autopilot

The lawsuit took issue with how Tesla advertised its Autopilot system, and suggested that the 31-year-old would not have been killed had the system performed as advertised. The lawsuit alleged that both Tesla and company boss Elon Musk had misrepresented the capabilities of the Level 2 driver-assistance system, causing Martinez to place too much trust in it.

The case was being overseen by Judge Vince Chhabria, who determined last year that the ‘Autopilot’ name was “plausibly misleading.” He also ruled that Musk’s statements about Autopilot, including statements in which he said it was “probably better” than a human driver, were legally actionable.

Did Tesla Make False Promises?

Contra Costa Fire Department/X

Data recovered from the wrecked Model S revealed that Autopilot had been engaged roughly 12 minutes before the crash. Because of advertising around the technology, the lawsuit said the driver thought the EV “would drive itself and he no longer needed to drive it.”

Tesla fiercely contested the claims, saying it wasn’t at fault given that Martinez had ignored warnings in the owner’s manual and active warnings while inside the vehicle. Despite this, the judge cleared the path for a jury trial where Musk’s statements on Autopilot would have inevitably been put under the microscope. To avoid this, Tesla has agreed to settle.

The automaker has settled numerous similar lawsuits in the past. In 2025, it opted against settling a case in Florida, and a jury returned a verdict that it must pay $243 million in damages in relation to the 2019 death of a man who was inside a Model S with Autopilot engaged, which hit a parked Chevrolet Tahoe.