On Tuesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk appeared in court again the next day to defend his company’s $ 2.6 billion acquisition of SolarCity. 4,444 shareholders sued Musk, claiming that Tesla’s acquisition of solar installers amounts to a ransom, and Musk, who is also chairman of the board of directors of both companies, promoted a settlement. Shareholders also claim that Musk controls Tesla’s board of directors, although he appears to have avoided some deal negotiations regarding SolarCity.
At the beginning of the questioning, the plaintiff’s attorney, Randy Baron (Randy Baron), painted a picture in which he said that Musk had repeatedly turned his back on the board of directors to conclude a deal between the two companies. At the same time, Musk insisted that all communications he made about the transaction before the board discussion were to provide the board with a comprehensive understanding.
“This is part of the boarding process to ensure the board has accurate information,” Musk said again wearing a black suit, white button-up shirt, and black tie.
Musk also denied Baron’s statement that he set a price for Tesla to acquire SolarCity. Barron noted that notes from a financial advisor showed Musk recommended that the board of directors give the company an offer of $ 28.50 per share. Subsequently, the board decided to be in the range of US $ 26.50 to the US $ 28.50. Musk denied establishing this range because he proposed a rate that he believed to be a standard rate. The board recommended a range but did not.
Shortly after 10:30 am EST, the court unexpectedly rose after a court clerk vomited.
On Monday, in Delaware Chancery Court, the typical opponent Musk did not respond to the attorney’s questions for a day and stood in the stands for about six hours. The trial is expected to last two weeks. Based on the time required for the Tesla CEO to complete his testimony on Tuesday, his brother and Tesla board member Kimbal Musk may appear in court later in the afternoon.
If Elon Musk loses the lawsuit, he may have to pay more than $ 2 billion in fees. In this case, called a shareholder derivatives lawsuit, the investor filed the lawsuit on behalf of the company, not the individual or the fund. If the plaintiff wins, the proceeds may flow to Tesla, rather than to the interested parties who sued.