Buzz Update Judge Rules Musk Go-Private tweet wrong, Tesla investors say TOU

Buzz Update Judge Rules Musk Go-Private tweet wrong, Tesla investors say


Judge Rules Musk Go-Private tweet wrong, Tesla investors say

(Bloomberg) – Tesla Inc. on Elon Musk’s 2018 tweet about taking the company private. The shareholders are suing, saying they have won a key verdict with billions of dollars in damages in the fraud trial.

Mostly read from Bloomberg

Investors said the federal judge agreed with them that “no reasonable jury would have been accurate or misleading the tweets made by Musk on August 7, 2018,” as the court filed late on Friday. The judge, not listed on the docket, explains filing the April 1 order.

Alex Spiro, a lawyer for Musk and Tesla, said: “Nothing will change the truth, that Elon Musk is considering taking Tesla privately and may have.

“What is left after half a decade is that the lawyers of the random plaintiff are trying to make money and trying to prevent others from revealing that fact is detrimental to freedom of speech,” he said Saturday.

The ruling – if not appealed – would be a major setback for the electric car maker in the San Francisco jury trial set for late May, as Tesla will not be allowed to argue that the controversial Twitter post is true. This allows investors to focus primarily on linking the Musk statement to their stock market losses.

The decision is a blow to the credibility of the world’s richest man as other chief executives continue to wage legal battles to escape or resolve. Musk is making a contradictory attempt to regulate Twitter Inc. with a pledge to turn the venue into a bastion for freedom of speech.

Musk told a New York federal judge in early March that he would “never lie to shareholders.” He is asking that judge to release him from the social media restrictions he agreed to after the Securities & Exchange Commission filed a lawsuit against him for cheating on 2018 tweets.

In San Francisco, shareholders in a securities fraud lawsuit called on U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen to bar Musk from making public comments about his lawsuit “comments and opinions” until the trial is over.

Read more: Musk venting about SEC Ayres investors suing over 2018 tweets

Investors have taken a specific aim at the comments Musk made at a TED event in Vancouver this week. He settled the agency lawsuit over the “I had to agree to the SEC illegally” and the 2018 “fund security” tweet.

Shareholders argue that Musk’s “undoubtedly wrong” August 2018 tweet and posts on Twitter cost him billions of dollars amid drastic fluctuations in Tesla’s stock prices, while Musk’s lawyers responded that the post was “absolutely true” to his millions of followers.

Musk’s lawyers are committed to supporting Saudi Arabia’s Sovereign Wealth Fund’s attempt to privatize Tesla to avoid allegations that Missive is fraudulent.

What Bloomberg Intelligence says

Theoretical losses could be up to $ 12 billion, but we expect the settlement value to be $ 260- $ 380 million.

– Holy From, Litigation Analyst

Click here for the full report

Advocates for the shareholders said Chen was “clear and unambiguous” in the order issued by the judge on April 1, stating that the August 2018 tweet was incorrect.

Prosecutors filed Friday alleging that judges Musk “recklessly made statements with knowledge of their lies.”

The judge’s order was not issued publicly and was shared with the parties on April 12, said Nicholas Porritt, counsel for the plaintiff.

“The court filed the order under the seal in advance because it indicates evidence that the defendants are considered confidential, but the parties, if any, are required to remain in the seal,” Porritt said in an email.

Court officials were not immediately available to confirm the judge’s orders.

Case Re Tesla Inc. Securities Litigation, 18-cv-04865, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).

(Updates with Complaints Lawyer Comment)

Most read from Bloomberg Businessweek

© 2022 Bloomberg LP

if you want to read this article from the original credit source of the article then you can read from here.

Leave a Reply