Trouble with Teslas: Vehicular Product Liability in an Era of Agile Development

Courtney Iseman

INTRODUCTION

Forty-eight-year-old doctor Omar Awan drove his 2016 Tesla Model S on an afternoon in early 2019.[1] During his drive, Dr. Awan experienced a collision.[2] As a result of the collision, the car caught fire.[3]  The Model S’s retractable door handles did not retract due to a battery fire.[4]  Police and bystanders helplessly watched as Dr. Awan asphyxiated inside the car.[5]

 

Despite door handles being one of the least considered attributes when purchasing a car,[6] Tesla and other luxury car makers have focused on designing sleek electronic handles.[7] Electronic door handles require a software-to-hardware interaction, in which the car’s computer allows the doors to be opened.[8] When a car with electric door handles has a computer malfunction, it impacts the car’s ability to open electronically.[9] 

Despite redesign efforts made by Tesla, a 2025 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) report may threaten to recall Tesla Model Ys.[10] The recall was spurred by injuries and fatalities attributed to Tesla’s door designs.[11] With electronic handles becoming more popular, it is integral to examine electronic door handles and product liability concerns. Will the 2025 NHTSA recall impact all electronic locking mechanisms? In contemplation of this inquiry, this post analyzes: (1) manual exits in Teslas; (2) the 2025 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Report; and (3) concerns about the rise of Minimal Viable Product dynamics in the car industry. 

DISCUSSION

I.              Manual Exits

            Dr. Awan drove a 2019 Tesla Model 3, which would have featured the pre-2025 manual release.[12] Manual releases are utilized in an emergency system when the software to open the electronic doors malfunctions.[13] Tesla faced criticism that the manual exits were unnoticed by users,[14] and in times of emergency, users would not know how to escape.[15] After much media outrage, in 2022 Tesla announced a new design on the manual exits.[16] Below shows the visual differences in the Model 3 of the emergency release mechanisms in the front seats. The left image shows the pre-2025 release, and the right shows the post-2025 release:

[17]

          

Both the pre-2025 and post-2025 emergency release systems use the same mechanisms, but now an icon indicates the release as a manual exit.[18] 

Further, changes were made to the emergency release system for the rear seats in a Model 3.[19] The rear emergency release is in the pockets of the back doors.[20] To open the release, one must open a cover to find a cable.[21] Then, the cable must be pulled forward. Below shows the visual differences in the Model 3 of the emergency release in the back seats:

[22]

 

The Model X features a distinct emergency release system compared to the Model 3.[23] In the case of a power outage in a Model X, to open the “Falcon Wing” doors, one must open the car’s speaker grille.[24] The speaker grille is secured by four clips. These clips must be unfastened to get to the release cable.[25] Once the speaker grille is removed, the emergency release cable must be pulled down towards the front of the vehicle.[26] Upon pulling the release cable, the passenger must physically lift the door to escape.[27] Below is an image of the Model X doors without the speaker grille, showing the manual release cable:

[28]

II.            Report

Despite the Model Y (2020-25 models) being awarded a 2025 Top Safety Pick Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,[29] the investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) began to probe into 174,000 Tesla’s due to the door’s emergency release system.[30] The NHTSA created a report on September 15, 2025.[31] The report was made specifically about the electronic doors and manual release systems in the 2021 Model Ys.[32]In some of these incidents, parents, seated in the front of the car, can escape the car.[33] Upon leaving the vehicles, the parents reported being unable to remove their children from the rear of the car.[34] Due to the electric locking mechanism, the only way to open the car door is through an emergency release, causing serious problems for children are often unable or unaware of the emergency release.[35] As a visual reference, the rear emergency release of the Model Y is the same as the emergency release in the Model 3.[36] 

Since 2018, on the NHTSA database, Tesla has received around 140 consumer complaints about door failures.[37] The report will lead to an investigation, in which NHTSA will determine if the Model Ys will face physical recall.[38] 

Physical exertion is not only an issue with the car’s users, but with first responders.[39] In December of 2023, Max Walsh, an on-duty firefighter, was called to a scene in which a Model Y collided with a utility pole and the battery caught fire. Mr. Walsh appeared at the scene a minute after the alert and was able to smash the front driver’s window.[40] However, a plume of toxic smoke made it difficult for Mr. Walsh to open the front door through the manual release system.[41] Unable to release the latch, Mr. Walsh pulled the driver through the window.[42] Mr. Walsh then moved to the front passenger window to rescue the driver’s wife.[43] Despite efforts to pound on the window, and by the time the hydraulic cutters could be utilized, the wife had passed from asphyxiation.[44]

The Model Y is not the only vehicle that received complaints about the manual exits.[45] One user reported that the Model X was difficult to escape, as the four speaker grille clips were hard to unfasten.[46] The user noted that opening the doors was difficult, even for those in physical shape.[47] Even a college basketball recruit, found it difficult to escape after his Cybertruck caught fire.[48] 

Tesla only addressed issues with the emergency locking mechanism by providing a graphic on the release.[49] However, the addition of the graphics is likely not enough.[50] Children or users who are not physically able to use theoften complex and physically exerting manual exits are at risk of serious injury or death.

III.          The Impacts of “Agile Development”

In 2024, Tesla had over 5 million recalls, more than Ford or other large manufacturers.[51] The recalls are attributed to software and sophisticated vehicle computer technologies.[52] Despite the magnitude of recalls, many of these recalls are over-the-air fixes.[53] Over-the-air fixes, unlike physical recalls, allow for the vehicle’s software to be fixed remotely through a car’s computer.[54] 

Tesla has addressed electronic door malfunctions with over-the-air software updates.[55] Both the Model S and Model X have faced previous voluntary recalls of the door’s electronic locking mechanism.[56] The entrapment was found in violation of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, No. 214, S9.2.3(b)(1).[57] Without physical recall, Tesla claimed to address the issue with its over-the-air software updates.[58]

The 2025 NHTSA Report is different than prior complaints of the Tesla software; it does not merely address the issue of unlocking, but the difficult nature of opening through manual releases.[59] Unlike software issues, this is an issue with the vehicle’s physical design.[60]

The NTHSA can demand a physical recall if Tesla fails to act on the defect.[61] How long did it take until 2025 for the NTHSA to address the issue of entrapment? One answer is Tesla’s attitude toward production, which may be classified as “Agile development.”[62]

The “Agile development” method encourages firms to release products relatively early on, at the Minimal Viable Product (MVP) level, even when they are still at an elementary level of testing and validation.”[63] MVP involves introducing a bare-bones product to customers, which encourages rapid development.[64] For MVPs, early consumers typically troubleshoot the product.[65] Through consumer complaints, the product is revised on a repeated basis, smoothing over any bugs to make a better product.[66] Early consumers are used to tweaking the product, rather than lab testing.[67] MVPs are typically used to innovate software, such as AI.[68] However, the use of early consumers as lab testers creates fuzzy legal implications of liability.[69] 

Today, a car’s software touches every element of the product —[70] it is the main driver of its value.[71] The trend of the importance of computers in cars has shifted their introduction to the market.[72] The sooner manufacturers and software developers can introduce a product to the market, the more value it collects.[73] The MVP trend of Agile development—using consumers as testers—has bled into the vehicle’s physical production.[74] Consequently, less research and development are performed on software.[75]

Currently, there are few legal remedies to solve the challenge of Agile development and quick tweaks in vehicles and their software.[76] Recalls have long lag periods to address a specific problem.[77] The process requires customers to go beyond supplying complaints.[78] Dealers typically offer repair after a complaint is made, to curtail notice to regulators.[79] For example, the General Motors brake recall in 1980, one of the largest recalls, took four years to complete an investigation of defects.[80] The NHSTA’s main tool for upkeeping/monitoring vehicle safety is recalling vehicles.[81] In a new world of agile tactics in vehicle manufacturing, the NHTSA’s complaint and regulatory system may need to adapt to today’s Agile development to prevent excessive injuries.[82] Further, courts have been reluctant to apply product liability to software because it is intangible.[83]

CONCLUSION

With Agile development in the era of MVP standards and over-the-air fixes, there is no modern, meaningful NHTSA interaction with faulty vehicles.[84] As software and computer systems become more and more complex in vehicles, NHTSA testing and remedy powers may need to adapt. Until now, Tesla has added new icons on manual releases and over-the-air software updates. Although Tesla has largely evaded physical recalls until now, the company may have to physically recall around 174,000 vehicles due to the 2025 NHTSA Model Y investigation.[85]

^[1] Sharon Cop & Tal. Zarsky, When Software Meets the Road: Responsibility for Defective Smart Carts in the MVP Era, 57 GA. L. REV. 1713, 1731 (2023).

^[2] Id.

^[3] Catherine Thorbecke, Man Fatally Burned in Fiery Tesla Crash After Door Wouldn't Open, Lawsuit Alleges, ABC NEWS (Oct. 24, 2019), https://abcnews.go.com/Business/man-burned-alive-fiery-tesla-crash-door-open/story?id=66498159

^[4] Cop, supra note 1, at 1731.

^[5] Thorbecke, Man Fatally Burned in Fiery Tesla Crash After Door Wouldn't Open, Lawsuit Alleges, ABC NEWS (Oct. 24, 2019).

^[6] Suneal Bedi & David Reibstein, Damaged Damages: Errors in Patent and False Advertising Litigation, 73 ALA. L. REV. 385, 418-19 (2021).

^[7] Andrei Nedelea, So You Just Got Trapped In Your EV With Electronic Door Latches: What To Do, INSIDE EVS (July 4, 2024), https://insideevs.com/features/725298/trapped-inside-ev-electronic-latches/

^[8] Cop, supra note 1, at 1717, 1731.

^[9] Id. at 1731.

^[10] See U.S. DEP. OF TRANS., OFFICE OF DEFECT INVESTIGATION: ODI RESUME (Sep. 15, 2025).

^[11] Id.

^[12] Cop, supra note 1, at 1731.

^[13] Tesla, Opening Doors with No Power, MODEL 3 OWNER’S MANUAL (last visited, Oct. 25, 2025), https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/model3/en_us/GUID-A7A60DC7-E476-4A86-9C9C-10F4A276AB8B.html

^[14] Cop, supra note 1, at 1731.

^[15] Dana Hull et al., When Teslas Lose Power, Crashes Can Turn into Deadly Races Against Time, BLOOMBERG: TESLA’S DANGEROUS DOORS (Sep. 10, 2025), https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2025-tesla-dangerous-doors/

^[16] Cop, supra note 1, at 1731.

^[17] Tesla, Opening Doors with No Power, MODEL 3 OWNER’S MANUAL (last visited, Oct. 25, 2025).

^[18] Id.

^[19] Id.

^[20] Id.

^[21] Id.

^[22] Id.

^[23] Hull, supra note 15.

^[24] Tesla, Opening Doors with No Power, MODEL X OWNER’S MANUAL (last visited, Oct. 25, 2025), https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modelx/en_us/GUID-AAD769C7-88A3-4695-987E-0E00025F64E0.html

^[25] Id.

^[26] Id.

^[27] Id.

^[28] Id.

^[29] IIHS HLDI, 2025 Top Safety Picks, HOME: VEHICLE RATINGS (last visited, Oct. 25, 2025), https://www.iihs.org/ratings/top-safety-picks?gad_source.

^[30] U.S. DEP. OF TRANSP., supra note 10, at 1.

^[31] Id.

^[32] Id.

^[33] Id. at 2.

^[34] Id.

^[35] Id.

^[36] Hull, supra note 15.

^[37] Id.

^[38] David Shepardson, US Opens Probe into 174,000 Tesla Model Y Cars Over Door Handle Failures, REUTERS (Sep. 16, 2025), https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-opens-probe-into-174000-tesla-model-y-cars-over-door-handle-failures-2025-09-16/

^[39] Hull, supra note 15.

^[40] Id.

^[41] Id.

^[42] Id.

^[43] Id.

^[44] Id.

^[45] See Tesery, Emergency Procedures for Tesla Model X Doors: A Comprehensive Guide, TESLA GUIDES (Dec. 26, 2023), https://www.tesery.com/blogs/tesla-model-3-s-x-y-cybertruck-guides/emergency-procedures-for-tesla-model-x-doors-a-comprehensive-guide.

^[46] Id.

^[47] Id.

^[48] Al Jazeera, Tesla Faces Safety Investigation Due to Faulty Door Handles, BUSINESS AND ECONOMY: ECONOMY (Sep. 15, 2025), https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2025/9/16/tesla-faces-safety-investigation-due-to-faulty-door-handles

^[49] Cop, supra note 1, at 1731.

^[50] David Shepardson, US Opens Probe into 174,000 Tesla Model Y Cars Over Door Handle Failures, REUTERS (Sep. 16, 2025) (physical recalls may be necessary).

^[51] Robert Duffer, Most Recalled Automaker of 2024? It wasn't Ford, THE CAR CONNECTION: NEWS (Jan. 10, 2025) https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1145483_most-recalled-automaker-of-2024-it-wasnt-ford

^[52] Id.

^[53] Al Root, Tesla Recalled 700,000 Cars. This Time Was Different, BARRON’S (Dec. 27, 2024), https://www.barrons.com/articles/tesla-recalls-nhtsa-software-ea0b09f1.

^[54] Id.

^[55] Tesla, Update Vehicle Firmware to Correct Door Lockout Functionality (last visited, Oct. 25, 2025) https://www.tesla.com/support/vehicle-firmware-correct-door-lockout-functionality.

^[56] Id.

^[57] Id.

^[58] Id.

^[59] U.S. DEP. OF TRANS., note 10, at 2.

^[60] Id.

^[61] David Shepardson, US Opens Probe into 174,000 Tesla Model Y Cars Over Door Handle Failures, REUTERS (Sep. 16, 2025).

^[62] Cop, supra note 1, at 1717-18.

^[63] Id.

^[64] Id. at 1718.

^[65] Id.

^[66] Id.

^[67] Id.

^[68] Matthew Gaske, Artificial Intelligence Regulation, Minimum Viable Products, and Partitive Innovation, 73 EMORY L. J. ONLINE 17, 21 (2023).

^[69] Cop, supra note 1, at 1718.

^[70] Id. at 1717.

^[71] Id. at 1717-18.

^[72] Id.

^[73] Id.

^[74] Id. at 1731 (the production of the car’s door hardware).

^[75] Id. at 1718.

^[76] Id. at 1719.

^[77] Id. at 1752.

^[78] Id. at 1753.

^[79] Id.

^[80] Id.

^[81] Id. at 1719.

^[82] Id.

^[83] Michael Rustad, Product Liability for Software Defects in Driverless Cars, 32 S. CAL. INDERDIS. L.J. 171, 229-30 (2022).

^[84] Cop, supra note 1, at 1718.

^[85] David Shepardson, US Opens Probe into 174,000 Tesla Model Y Cars Over Door Handle Failures, REUTERS (Sep. 16, 2025).