Musk didn’t say Tesla’s autonomous driving technology could drive safer than humans, and the electric-vehicle company represented it needed a “fully attentive driver,” said US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit judges in an unpublished memorandum. “Thus, fairly considered, Musk represented that a driver with the technology is safer than a driver without it.”
Nor did the investors, Oakland County Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association and Oakland County Employees’ Retirement System, adequately plead Musk’s representations ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.