News
Tesla lawsuit defendant fires lawyers after TSLA short financing is revealed
Tesla’s lawsuit against former employee Martin Tripp has taken an unusual turn.
After publishing a large number of documents and videos online over the last week, including many under a confidentiality order in the case, Tripp has now fired his lawyers and will represent himself moving forward. Notably, this action coincided with the revelation that a TSLA short seller, The Funicular Fund, LP (dba Cable Car Capital LLC), was financing Tripp’s legal defense.
The case has been ongoing since 2018 wherein Tesla filed a complaint alleging that Tripp, a former process technician at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada, had stolen several gigabytes of confidential trade secret information and transferred it to third parties. Tripp denies wrongdoing and claims to be a whistleblower reporting evidence of securities fraud and concerns over safety during early Model 3 manufacturing. He has further filed a counterclaim against Tesla in the case, alleging defamation.
Following a report published by Bloomberg revealing Car Capital’s financial role in the case, Tripp took to Twitter to both double down and explain his actions.
“Why should it be a secret as to who is financing my litigation? …My Attys were certainly secretive, and made it clear that I NOT say a word about it if questioned…,” he wrote. “To be clear…I did NOT accept money to fund my litigation from a ‘short seller.’ I accepted litigation financing from an investor… They DID tell me they short tesla stock (and other stocks if I am not mistaken). But, I don’t give a shit about shorting, whatever the hell it is. I care about, you guessed it…the truth, and being able to fight for it.”
In the documents Tripp published via Google Drive, several letters and two documents titled “Litigation Funding Agreement” revealed that Cable Car Capital had invested $150,000 into Tripp’s defense and another $125,000 was later sought after the first round was near exhaustion. Tesla responded immediately to the revelation and filed an Emergency Motion on Monday demanding Tripp be ordered to stop publishing the information and stop ‘harassing’ the carmaker’s counsel, among other things.
In addition to publishing confidential information, Tripp had also posted a copy of an email from Tesla’s counsel, Jeanine Zalduendo, to his attorneys demanding the cessation of his actions. “No Jeanine, I don’t think I will…,” he wrote on Twitter with an image of the correspondence attached.
The judge in the case, formally Tesla Inc. v. Tripp and assigned number 18-cv-00296 in USDC District of Nevada (Reno), held an emergency court hearing via teleconference the same day of Tesla’s emergency filing. Tripp was ordered to stop publishing and discussing the confidential information and a hearing was scheduled to determine whether he would also be held in contempt of court and face sanctions, according to Bloomberg.
On Tuesday, Tripp’s lawyer filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel with Consent, formally ending the firm’s relationship with the defendant. “On August 7, 2020, undersigned counsel received notice via an e-mail sent from Mr. Tripp’s e-mail address that he wished to terminate the attorney-client relationship and represent himself,” the document stated. The former Tesla employee also posted several videos on YouTube detailing his actions and decision.
Throughout his numerous Twitter discussion threads on the matter in the hours since learning about Tesla’s Emergency Motion, Tripp has continued to discuss the original confidential information in depth. Part of the communications has detailed how difficult it was to obtain legal funding to counter the lawsuit originally. Tripp has also set up a GoFundMe account to assist with both legal expenses and his cost of living in Hungary, where he currently resides.
Tesla’s Emergency Motion can be read below.
Tesla v Tripp – Tesla Emerg… by DJ Ferris on Scribd
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
