Billionaire Elon Musk’s tendency to dish out insults whereas being questioned beneath oath will probably be examined anew on Monday, when attorneys for Twitter Inc are because of interview the Tesla Inc CEO about his abrupt choice in July to ditch his $44 billion deal for the social media firm.
Testifying in previous authorized battles, the world’s richest particular person has referred to as opposing attorneys “reprehensible,” questioned their happiness and accused them of “extortion.” He requested one lawyer if he was engaged on a contingency as a result of the lawyer’s shopper was allegedly behind on baby assist funds.
“So in all probability you’re on a contingency otherwise you’re taking that child’s cash. Which is it?” Musk requested a lawyer for a whistleblower in a case in opposition to Tesla, in response to a transcript of the 2020 deposition.
The high-stakes Twitter interview is closed to the general public and scheduled to start on Monday and run into Wednesday, if wanted, in response to courtroom data.
Musk’s attorneys will need to hold him targeted on answering questions, however that may be a problem with such a sensible and opinionated witness, stated James Morsch, a company litigator who isn’t concerned within the courtroom battle.
“I might examine it to attempting to carry a tiger by his tail,” Morsch stated.
In a 2019 deposition in litigation over Tesla’s takeover of solar-panel maker SolarCity, Musk refused 5 occasions to reply one of many preliminary questions due to the way in which it was worded, the transcript exhibits.
“We will stare at one another till you rephrase it,” Musk advised opposing lawyer Randall Baron, in response to a transcript.
“I’ll guess we’ll simply cancel this deposition,” Baron responded. Baron prompt that he would search an order from the decide directing Musk to reply questions, which appeared to get issues transferring.
Twitter declined to remark and Musk’s authorized staff didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.
Twitter’s attorneys are anticipated to make use of the interview to attempt to present that Musk deserted the deal because of falling monetary markets and never as a result of the corporate misled him about the true variety of customers or hid safety flaws, as he alleged.
Musk desires a decide to permit him to stroll away with out penalty, whereas Twitter desires an order forcing him to purchase the corporate for $54.20 per share. Twitter’s inventory ended up 0.4% at $41.58 on Friday.
A five-day trial is scheduled to start on Oct. 17 in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dozens of depositions are scheduled within the case, together with of Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal on Monday, as either side questions witnesses and gathers proof to make its case. Agrawal is scheduled to reply questions from Musk’s attorneys at a regulation agency in San Francisco beginning at 9 a.m. native time, in response to a courtroom submitting.
Twitter co-founder and former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was scheduled to be deposed final week.
Musk at occasions has proven in his depositions the attraction and wit he deploys on Twitter, the place he has constructed a cult-like following.
The Twitter deposition environment may very well be particularly fraught. Its authorized staff contains the agency of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and the principle lawyer on the case, Invoice Savitt, initially represented Musk and Tesla within the SolarCity deal, though not throughout discovery and depositions within the litigation.
Savitt didn’t reply to a request for remark.
Twitter can be represented by Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
A continuing within the three depositions reviewed by Reuters is Musk’s dislike of attorneys representing the opposing aspect, who he accuses of “trickery” and pursuing him merely for cash.
“I heard yesterday that 3% of the U.S. financial system is authorized providers. That’s one of many saddest info I’ve heard in a very long time,” Musk stated to Baron, the lawyer within the SolarCity deposition.
The deposition within the litigation with the Tesla whistleblower, Martin Tripp, who accused the corporate of losing uncooked supplies, started with Musk being requested if he understood the oath he took to testify honestly.
“This seems like some type of legalese, semantic argument. The — what’s the complete fact of one thing?” requested Musk, in response to the transcript. “You say, ‘Is {that a} tree? What sort of tree is it? Is it a tree with plenty of leaves?’ Or is — in the event you’re saying one thing is a tree is the entire fact? No, after all not.”
Tripp’s lawyer reminded Musk that the decide warned he would oversee the deposition in particular person if questions weren’t answered correctly.
“Do you plan to adjust to the decide’s admonition there?” requested lawyer William Fishbach.
“In fact,” Musk stated.