Heresniak

Heresniak v. Musk

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 22, 20233:22-cv-03074California5,975 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

1 Heresniak alleges as follows: 2 Musk, a prolific user of Twitter, began acquiring large amounts of Twitter stock in 3 Spring 2022. See SAC (dkt. 66) ¶¶ 46, 50. In March 2022, after Musk had purchased 4 more than five percent of Twitter’s common stock, he contacted his friends on the Twitter 5 board, Egon Durban, managing partner at private equity firm Silver Lake, and Jack 6 Dorsey, a founder and former CEO of Twitter, to discuss “the future direction of social 7 media” and the prospect of Musk joining the board. Id. ¶¶ 57–59. Durban then contacted 8 other members of the board, who offered Musk a seat soon thereafter. Id. ¶¶ 59, 75. 9 Meanwhile, Musk continued to acquire more Twitter stock, becoming Twitter’s 10 largest individual shareholder at 9.2 percent. Id. ¶ 66. Despite surpassing the trigger point 11 for disclosure in late March, he belatedly filed a Form 13G on April 4, 2022, and then a 12 Form 13D on April 5. Id. ¶¶ 61–62. The Wall Street Journal estimated that Musk had 13 saved $143 million by failing to promptly disclose his stake, while he continued to 14 purchase stock at artificially depressed prices. Id. ¶¶ 64–66. 15 Already in intense…

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.