Vespremi

Vespremi v. Tesla Motors CA1/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 2015A138126California4,748 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stewart, J.

BACKGROUND

Glaudell sued Tesla and others in January 2009. After a series of demurrers and amended complaints, the trial court sustained Tesla’s demurrer to his third amended complaint without leave to amend and entered a judgment of dismissal in Tesla’s favor.1 Glaudell appealed from this judgment. In case number A127008, in an unpublished opinion, we affirmed the judgment, except we reversed and vacated the court’s dismissal of Glaudell’s breach of contract cause of action and remanded the matter to the trial court for further proceedings. In his fourth amended complaint, Glaudell alleged breach of contract as follows: He was hired as Tesla’s chief information officer beginning in May 2007 pursuant to a written employment agreement. He was terminated less than a year later as part of a reduction of force. His employment agreement granted him an option to purchase 100,000 shares of Tesla common stock pursuant to a stock incentive plan that vested commencing with his first day of employment. A quarter of these shares vested one year after the defined “vesting commencement date” and one-forty-eighth vested each month thereafter. Glaudell intended to purchase common stock in blocks…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.