The judge in the Elon Musk pay package case is being warned by the Delaware High Court that the massive legal fee windfall is a major risk.
Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick is the judge who ruled that Musk’s massive $56 billion pay package was too much money and ruled it to be not in the best interest of the shareholders. However, the attorneys who took on the case and successfully had the pay package revoked are now set to hit it big with a potential pay rate of $280,000 an hour — an unprecedented amount.
The Delaware High Court told McCormick earlier this month that these massive paydays can “turn into a windfall,” according to a report from Reuters.
Elon Musk’s attorneys plead with Judge to vacate $56bn Tesla pay package decision
A professor at Tulane Law School is quoted in the story, stating that, while some fees, although astronomical, are appropriate, there “is a line where it’s simply past what is necessary to incentivize high-risk cases.”
Of course, high-risk cases deserve high rewards, especially when they are successfully tried. However, is the amount the team of lawyers requests appropriate or even deserved?
That’s where things get interesting. The firms requested an 11 percent fee of the stock that Musk would have gotten if he won the case, which works out to roughly 29 million shares. This is nearly $6 billion in Tesla shares.
They also said they would take $1 billion in cash instead. They believe they deserve it because they won “arguably the largest judgment in U.S. history,” the report states.
This works out to $280,000 an hour, but the highest-paid corporate attorneys are paid around $2,500 an hour. However, a 2012 case that resulted in the largest fee in history at $304 million for a $2 billion judgment against Souther Copper Corp. worked out to about $35,000 an hour.
Musk’s pay package was once again voted on months after McCormick’s ruling and was rectified by shareholders who approved it in an overwhelming fashion. If McCormick decides that the shareholder vote should take precedence over her ruling because the owners of the company, or the investors, voted for it, it puts the Chancellor in a tough position.
Tesla attorney Paul Reed said that Tesla should not be responsible for a large legal fee if that’s the case.
“You asked if Elon Musk was overpaid. We want to ask if the plaintiff’s lawyers are being overpaid,” Reed said.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
Tesla Giga Berlin plant manager faces defamation probe after IG Metall union complaint
Prosecutors in Frankfurt (Oder) confirmed they have opened a defamation probe into Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig.
Tesla’s Giga Berlin plant manager is now under investigation after a complaint from trade union IG Metall, escalating tensions ahead of next month’s works council elections.
Prosecutors in Frankfurt (Oder) confirmed they have opened a defamation probe into Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig, as per a report from rbb24.
A spokesperson for the Frankfurt (Oder) public prosecutor’s office confirmed to the German Press Agency that an investigation for defamation has been initiated following a criminal complaint filed by IG Metall against Thierig.
The dispute stems from Tesla’s allegation that an IG Metall representative secretly recorded a works council meeting using a laptop. In a post on X, Thierig described the incident as “truly beyond words,” stating that police were called and a criminal complaint was filed.
“What has happened today at Giga Berlin is truly beyond words! An external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting. For unknown reasons, he recorded the internal meeting and was caught in action! We obviously called police and filed a criminal complaint!” Thierig wrote in a post on X.
Police later confirmed that officers did seize a computer belonging to an IG Metall member at Giga Berlin. Prosecutors are separately investigating the union representative on suspicion of breach of confidentiality and violation of Germany’s Works Constitution Act.
IG Metall has denied Tesla’s allegations. The union claimed that its member offered to unlock the laptop for review in order to accelerate the investigation and counter what it called false accusations. The union has also sought a labor court injunction to “prohibit Thierig from further disseminating false claims.”
The clash comes as Tesla employees prepare to vote in works council elections scheduled for March 2–4, 2026. Approximately 11,000 Giga Berlin workers are eligible to participate in the elections.
News
Tesla wins FCC approval for wireless Cybercab charging system
The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment.
Tesla has received approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to use Ultra-Wideband (UWB) radio technology in its wireless EV charging system.
The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment. This effectively clears a regulatory hurdle for the company’s planned wireless charging pad for the autonomous two-seater.
Tesla’s wireless charging system is described as follows in the document: “The Tesla positioning system is an impulse UWB radio system that enables peer-to-peer communications between a UWB transceiver installed on an electric vehicle (EV) and a second UWB transceiver installed on a ground-level pad, which could be located outdoors, to achieve optimal positioning for the EV to charge wirelessly.”
The company explained that Bluetooth is first used to locate the charging pad. “Prior to the UWB operation, the vehicular system uses Bluetooth technology for the vehicle to discover the location of the ground pad and engage in data exchange activities (which is not subject to the waiver).”
Once the vehicle approaches the pad, the UWB system briefly activates. “When the vehicle approaches the ground pad, the UWB transceivers will operate to track the position of the vehicle to determine when the optimal position has been achieved over the pad before enabling wireless power charging.”
Tesla also emphasized that “the UWB signals occur only briefly when the vehicle approaches the ground pad; and mostly at ground level between the vehicle and the pad,” and that the signals are “significantly attenuated by the body of the vehicle positioned over the pad.”
As noted by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, the FCC ultimately granted Tesla’s proposal since the Cybercab’s wireless charging system’s signal is very low power, it only turns on briefly while parking, it works only at very short range, and it won’t interfere with other systems.
While the approval clears the way for Tesla’s wireless charging plans, the Cybercab does not appear to depend solely on the new system.
Cybercab prototypes have frequently been spotted charging at standard Tesla Superchargers across the United States. This suggests the vehicle can easily operate within Tesla’s existing charging network even as the wireless system is developed and deployed. With this in mind, it would not be surprising if the first batches of the Cybercab that are deployed and delivered to consumers end up being charged by regular Superchargers.
Elon Musk
Tesla posts updated FSD safety stats as owners surpass 8 billion miles
Tesla shared the milestone as adoption of the system accelerates across several markets.
Tesla has posted updated safety stats for Full Self-Driving Supervised. The results were shared by the electric vehicle maker as FSD Supervised users passed more than 8 billion cumulative miles.
Tesla shared the milestone in a post on its official X account.
“Tesla owners have now driven >8 billion miles on FSD Supervised,” the company wrote in its post on X. Tesla also included a graphic showing FSD Supervised’s miles driven before a collision, which far exceeds that of the United States average.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable. As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
Tesla also recently updated the safety data for FSD Supervised on its website, covering North America across all road types over the latest 12-month period.
As per Tesla’s figures, vehicles operating with FSD Supervised engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. In comparison, Teslas driven manually with Active Safety systems recorded one major collision every 2,175,763 miles, while Teslas driven manually without Active Safety recorded one major collision every 855,132 miles. The U.S. average during the same period was one major collision every 660,164 miles.
During the measured period, Tesla reported 830 total major collisions with FSD (Supervised) engaged, compared to 16,131 collisions for Teslas driven manually with Active Safety and 250 collisions for Teslas driven manually without Active Safety. Total miles logged exceeded 4.39 billion miles for FSD (Supervised) during the same timeframe.
Tesla Giga Berlin plant manager faces defamation probe after IG Metall union complaint
Tesla wins FCC approval for wireless Cybercab charging system
