Billionaire Elon Musk’s penchant for defamation under oath will be tested anew this week, when Twitter’s lawyers are expected to interview the Tesla CEO in July about his $44 billion (roughly Rs. 3,37,465 crore) sudden decision. ) ) deal for a social media company.
Testifying in past legal battles, the world’s richest man has called opposing lawyers “reprehensible”, questioned their complacency and accused them of “extortion”. He asked a lawyer if he was working on a contingency because the lawyer’s client was allegedly behind on child support payments.
“So maybe you’re on a contingency or you’re taking the guy’s money. Which is it?” Musk asked a lawyer for a whistleblower in the lawsuit against Tesla, according to a 2020 deposition transcript.
The high-stakes Twitter interview is closed to the public. A court filing last week said Musk’s testimony was scheduled to begin Monday and continue Wednesday if necessary. Sources with knowledge of the testimony said Musk had not been questioned on Monday and did not know what day it would begin, nor did they provide a reason for the delay.
Musk’s attorneys want him to focus on answering questions, but that could be a challenge with such an intelligent and opinionated witness, said James Morsh, a corporate attorney not involved in the court battle.
“I would compare it to trying to catch a tiger by its tail,” Morsch said.
In a 2019 lawsuit over Tesla’s takeover of solar-panel maker SolarCity, Musk refused five times to answer an opening question because it was worded, the transcript shows.
“We can stare at each other until you say it again,” Musk told opposing counsel Randall Barron, according to a transcript.
“I guess we’ll just scrap the post,” the baron replied. Barron suggested that he would direct Musk to answer questions from the judge, which seemed to shake things up.
Twitter declined to comment, and Musk’s legal team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Twitter’s lawyers are expected to use the interview to try to show that Musk walked away from the deal because of a slump in financial markets and not because the company misled him about the actual number of users or covered up security flaws, as he has alleged.
Musk wants the judge to let him walk away without paying a fine, while Twitter wants an order forcing him to buy the company for $54.20 (roughly Rs. 4,180) per share. Shares of Twitter ended up 0.4 percent at $41.58 (roughly Rs. 3,300) on Friday.
The five-day trial begins October 17 in Wilmington, Delaware.
The case features dozens of witnesses, including Twitter CEO Parag Agarwal, as each side questions witnesses and gathers evidence to make its case.
Agarwal was scheduled to answer questions from Musk’s lawyers at a law firm in San Francisco at 9.00 am local time (9.30 am IST) on Monday, according to court filings, sources said, adding that the testimony was also postponed and did not give a reason. .
Twitter co-founder and former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was slated to be ousted last week.
What is the whole truth?
Kasturi has at times shown the charm and tact he puts into his posts on Twitter, where he has built a cult-like following.
The Twitter deposition environment can be particularly fruitful. His legal team includes Wachtel, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and Bill Savitt, the lead attorney on the case, initially represented Musk and Tesla in the SolarCity deal, though not during discovery and trial depositions.
Savitt did not respond to a request for comment.
Twitter is also represented by Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
One constant in the three depositions reviewed by Reuters is that Musk’s representative is a lawyer representing the opposing side, whom he accuses of “fraud” and only pursuing him for money.
“I heard yesterday that 3% of the US economy is legal services. That’s one of the saddest facts I’ve heard in a long time,” Musk told Barron’s, a lawyer for SolarCity.
Musk was asked during his trial with Tesla whistleblower Martin Tripp, who accused the company of wasting raw materials, whether he understood his oath to testify to the truth.
“That sounds like some sort of legitimate, meaningful argument. – What is the absolute truth of something?” asked Musk, according to the transcript. “You say, ‘Is that a tree? What kind of tree is that? Is it a tree with lots of leaves?’ Or is – if you say something is a tree, is the whole truth? No, of course not.”
Tripp’s lawyers reminded Musk that the judge had warned that he would personally oversee the testimony if questions were not answered correctly.
“Do you intend to follow the judge’s instructions there?” asked attorney William Fishback.
“Of course,” Musk said.
© Thomson Reuters 2022
