Connect with us

News

Tesla investor’s legal team urges DE court to respect Musk pay ratification vote

Credit: Andrea Conway/X

Published

1 year ago

on

Tesla shareholders ratified Elon Musk’s 2018 CEO Performance Award at the 2024 Cyber Roundup, but the fight about the matter in Delaware Court is not over just yet. This was highlighted in a joinder filed by the legal team of a TSLA investor who decided to challenge the astronomical fee request of the lawyers of shareholder Richard Tornetta, who filed a legal complaint about Musk’s 2018 pay package at a time when he held just nine shares of the EV maker. 

Tornetta’s legal team has argued that they deserve to be paid over 29 million shares of TSLA for their services in the case, which translated to over $5 billion at the time or over $200,000 per hour. Tesla shareholder Amy Steffens, a longtime investor of Tesla with over 19,000 shares, secured her own legal team to challenge the fee request of Tornetta’s lawyers. Following the decision of Tesla investors to ratify Musk’s pay package at the 2024 Cyber Roundup, Tornetta’s legal team argued that the ratification of the CEO’s pay package was invalid since investors were still “coerced” and “uninformed.” The lawyers also described the events that transpired leading up to the ratification of Musk’s pay package as a “clown show.” 

Steffens’ legal team has now submitted a joinder for the case, which will hopefully be heard later this week when the court is expected to hold a hearing for the motion to reconsider the Delaware Judge’s preliminary ruling in the case. The joinder, parts of which were shared on X by Tesla investor Alexandra Merz, argued that the ratification of Musk’s pay package by TSLA shareholders showed that Tornetta’s complaint against the CEO Performance Award “provided no tangible economic benefit to Tesla or its stockholders.” Steffens’ legal team also highlighted that contrary to the claims of Tornetta’s lawyers, the shareholder vote on Musk’s pay plan is likely among the most informed stockholder votes in Delaware history. 

“The Ratification Vote was fully informed indeed, it is likely among the most informed votes in Delaware corporate history. The extensive proxy filings included this Court’s rescission opinion, so Tesla’s stockholders were well aware of the issues identified by this Court prior to their ratification vote. The ratification issue was robustly debated online, on television, and in newspapers. Opponents— including Mr. Tornetta’s experts in this litigation made their voices heard.’ When the votes came in, Mr. Tornetta lost decisively: 72% of disinterested voting shares favored ratification,” the lawyers wrote. 

Steffens’ legal team also addressed the “clown show” comment from Tornetta’s attorneys. “Mr. Tornetta’s counsel disparages this exercise of stockholder democracy as a ‘clown show.’ It is anything but. Ms. Steffens and Tesla’s other stockholders had all the relevant facts before them, including this Court’s decision, and determined that the 2018 Grant benefited them more than rescission. When stockholders freely petition their elected board for a vote, and then overwhelmingly affirm a board’s decision by voting to uphold it, further litigation by a derivative plaintiff attacking that democratically determined result is neither necessary nor appropriate,” Steffens’ legal team noted.

The longtime Tesla investors’ legal team urged the court to respect TSLA stockholders’ democracy as well. “Even beyond Due Process concerns, respect for stockholder democracy commends limiting Plaintiff’s continuing role in light of the Ratification Vote. Here, the question goes beyond Mr. Tornetta’s adequacy to the source of his authority. When Mr. Tornetta steps into the shoes of Tesla as a derivative plaintiff, he does so without democratic legitimacy. Tesla’s stockholders can vote out their directors, but they lack any democratic means to revoke Mr. Tornetta’s authority as a plaintiff. 

“Ms. Steffens respectfully suggests that in this specific context-where a supermajority of fully-informed, uncoerced stockholders unambiguously repudiates the relief obtained by a derivative plaintiff-the Court should treat this as a vote of no confidence and withdraw Mr. Tornetta’s authority to act on behalf of the Company. At the very least, where a plaintiff has shown himself willing to pay his counsel hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour to engage in legal work that conflicts directly with the wishes of the vast majority of stockholders, those stockholders should have some means (through the ballot box or the courtroom) to eliminate that plaintiff’s authority to continue to engage in such damaging conduct while purporting to act on their behalf,” the longtime TSLA shareholder’s legal team wrote. 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk seems to have appreciated the efforts of the TSLA stockholder’s legal team. Responding to a post about the matter on social media platform X, Musk responded to the shareholder’s efforts with a couple of “lit” emojis. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement
Related Topics:

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla to increase Full Self-Driving subscription price: here’s when

Published

4 hours ago

on

January 24, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla will increase its Full Self-Driving subscription price, meaning it will eventually be more than the current $99 per month price tag it has right now.

Already stating that the ability to purchase the suite outright will be removed, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said earlier this week that the Full Self-Driving subscription price would increase when its capabilities improve:

“I should also mention that the $99/month for supervised FSD will rise as FSD’s capabilities improve. The massive value jump is when you can be on your phone or sleeping for the entire ride (unsupervised FSD).”

This was an expected change, especially as Tesla has been hinting for some time that it is approaching a feature-complete version of Full Self-Driving that will no longer require driver supervision. However, with the increase, some are concerned that they may be priced out.

$99 per month is already a tough ask for some. While Full Self-Driving is definitely worth it just due to the capabilities, not every driver is ready to add potentially 50 percent to their car payment each month to have it.

While Tesla has not revealed any target price for FSD, it does seem that it will go up to at least $150.

Additionally, the ability to purchase the suite outright is also being eliminated on February 14, which gives owners another reason to be slightly concerned about whether they will be able to afford to continue paying for Full Self-Driving in any capacity.

Some owners have requested a tiered program, which would allow people to pay for the capabilities they want at a discounted price.

Unsupervised FSD would be the most expensive, and although the company started removing Autopilot from some vehicles, it seems a Supervised FSD suite would still attract people to pay between $49 and $99 per month, as it is very useful.

Tesla will likely release pricing for the Unsupervised suite when it is available, but price increases could still come to the Supervised version as things improve.

This is not the first time Musk has hinted that the price would change with capability improvements, either. He’s been saying it for some time. In 2020, he even said the value of FSD would “probably be somewhere in excess of $100,000.”

Continue Reading

News

Tesla starts removing outright Full Self-Driving purchase option at time of order

Published

7 hours ago

on

January 24, 2026

By

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has chosen to axe the ability to purchase Full Self-Driving outright from a select group of cars just days after CEO Elon Musk announced the company had plans to eliminate that option in February.

The company is making a clear-cut stand that it will fully transition away from the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright, a move that has brought differing opinions throughout the Tesla community.

Earlier this week, the company also announced that it will no longer allow buyers to purchase Full Self-Driving outright when ordering a pre-owned vehicle from inventory. Instead, that will be available for $99 per month, the same price that it costs for everyone else.

The ability to buy the suite for $8,000 for a one-time fee at the time of order has been removed:

This is a major move because it is the first time Tesla is eliminating the ability to purchase FSD outright for one flat fee to any of its vehicles, at least at the time of purchase.

It is trying to phase out the outright purchase option as much as it can, preparing people for the subscription-based service it will exclusively offer starting on February 14.

In less than a month, it won’t be available on any vehicle, which has truly driven some serious conversation from Tesla owners throughout the community.

There’s a conflict, because many believe that they will now lose the ability to buy FSD and not pay for it monthly, which is an attractive offer. However, others believe, despite paying $8,000 for FSD, that they will have to pay more money on top of that cost to get the unsupervised suite.

Additionally, CEO Elon Musk said that the FSD suite’s subscription price would increase over time as capabilities increase, which is understandable, but is also quite a conflict for those who spent thousands to have what was once promised to them, and now they may have to pay even more money.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Robotaxi has a highly-requested hardware feature not available on typical Model Ys

These camera washers are crucial for keeping the operation going, as they are the sole way Teslas operate autonomously. The cameras act as eyes for the car to drive, recognize speed limit and traffic signs, and travel safely.

Published

10 hours ago

on

January 24, 2026

By

Credit: David Moss | X

Tesla Robotaxi has a highly-requested hardware feature that is not available on typical Model Ys that people like you and me bring home after we buy them. The feature is something that many have been wanting for years, especially after the company adopted a vision-only approach to self-driving.

After Tesla launched driverless Robotaxi rides to the public earlier this week in Austin, people have been traveling to the Lone Star State in an effort to hopefully snag a ride from one of the few vehicles in the fleet that are now no longer required to have Safety Monitors present.

BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor

Although only a few of those completely driverless rides are available, there have been some new things seen on these cars that are additions from regular Model Ys, including the presence of one new feature: camera washers.

With the Model Y, there has been a front camera washer, but the other exterior “eyes” have been void of any solution for this. For now, owners are required to clean them manually.

In Austin, Tesla is doing things differently. It is now utilizing camera washers on the side repeater and rear bumper cameras, which will keep the cameras clean and keep operation as smooth and as uninterrupted as possible:

These camera washers are crucial for keeping the operation going, as they are the sole way Teslas operate autonomously. The cameras act as eyes for the car to drive, recognize speed limit and traffic signs, and travel safely.

This is the first time we are seeing them, so it seems as if Safety Monitors might have been responsible for keeping the lenses clean and unobstructed previously.

However, as Tesla transitions to a fully autonomous self-driving suite and Robotaxi expands to more vehicles in the Robotaxi fleet, it needed to find a way to clean the cameras without any manual intervention, at least for a short period, until they can return for interior and exterior washing.

Continue Reading