Connect with us

Investor's Corner

Tesla shareholder’s legal team adjusts demand to $1.44 billion in fees for Musk pay case

Credit: Tesla China

Published

on

The legal team of Tesla shareholder Richard Tornetta, who filed a legal complaint against Elon Musk’s 2018 CEO Performance Award, has adjusted their plaintiff fee request to the Delaware Court. Tornetta’s legal team noted that they could adjust their proposed fee to just $73,948 per hour, which would amount to a cash award of roughly $1.44 billion.

The Tornetta vs. Musk case became a notable issue for the electric vehicle maker back in January when Judge Kathaleen McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery rescinded Musk’s 2018 CEO Performance Award. For their work in the case, Tornetta’s legal team argued that they should be granted 29.4 million TSLA shares. Such an amount would be worth over $5 billion, or more than $200,000 per hour. 

Tesla has argued against Tornetta’s legal team’s arguments. As noted in a Reuters report, the electric vehicle maker argued that the legal team of the Tesla shareholder — who held nine shares when he filed his complaint against Musk’s 2018 pay package — should be paid just about $13.6 million for their work. Longtime Tesla retail shareholder Amy Steffens has also secured legal counsel to challenge the $200,000 per hour fee request of Tornetta’s attorneys

In their recent filing, Tornetta’s legal team proposed an alternative way of looking at the fees for their work in the case. While the legal team rejected Tesla’s $13.6 million legal fee argument, and while the attorneys still argued that the court should strongly consider granting them over 29 million TSLA shares as payment, they noted that the Court could go for a cash-based alternative structure instead. Such a system would lower their hourly rate to $73,948, and would result in a payment of around $1.44 billion. 

Following are sections of the filing from Tornetta’s lawyers. 

Advertisement

“While Plaintiff’s Counsel sincerely believe the award sought is appropriate, earned, and indeed conservative under Delaware law—the Action did, after all, rescind an ‘unfathomable’ $55B compensation package, the largest in history by multiples—Plaintiff’s Counsel acknowledge the requested award, if granted, would be record-setting and the subject of significant commentary. Were the Court concerned by the requested award’s size and desirous of a different approach, there are other alternatives available that address the expressed concerns about “windfalls.”

“Specifically, $35,000/hour cannot be a ‘windfall’ because that hourly rate was awarded by this Court and affirmed by the Supreme Court over a decade ago in Southern Peru. Adjusted to today’s dollars, a $35,000 hourly rate would be over $55,600/hour. It follows, a fortiori, that for a substantial verdict on the order of Southern Peru, an award of at least $55,600/hour is not a ‘windfall.’ 

“Indeed, even Tesla argues that this Action created compensable value equal to its calculation of the Grant’s $2.3B GDFV. But even using this low-end value estimate, the benefit Plaintiff achieved here was significantly higher than the $1.347B (pre-interest) Southern Peru benefit. Thus, a low-end cash award of roughly $1.0842B could be fashioned based solely on the affirmed, inflation-adjusted Southern Peru numbers.

“But any such award would be unfairly low for two reasons. First, as noted in Plaintiff’s Opening Brief, this Court in Southern Peru—after admonishing plaintiff’s counsel to seek a conservative fee given ‘the reality [that] their own delays affected the remedy awarded’—further reduced that request by one-third as a penalty for counsel taking so long to prosecute the case that rescission was impossible. Second, the ~$51B benefit achieved here is approximately 38x higher than the benefit achieved in Southern Peru

“Adjusting for the one-third penalty assessed in Southern Peru—which was applied to an already conservative 22.5% request by that plaintiff—brings the inflation-adjusted lodestar to $73,948/hour, which yields a fee of approximately $1.44B. Adjusting further to reflect the much higher result here is a matter of the Court’s discretion Plaintiff’s Counsel would submit that exercising the Court’s discretion to award a cash fee of roughly twice the inflation-adjusted Southern Peru hourly rate after reversing for the discount appropriately reflects the substantially greater benefit achieved here,” Tornetta’s lawyers wrote. 

Advertisement

The fling from Tornetta’s lawyers can be viewed below (via Plainsite). 

gov.uscourts.delch.2018-0408-KSJM.387.0 by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

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

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

Investor's Corner

Tesla welcomes Chipotle President Jack Hartung to its Board of Directors

Tesla announced the addition of its new director in a post on social media platform X.

Published

on

Credit: @ArthurFromX/X

Tesla has welcomed Chipotle president Jack Hartung to its Board of Directors. Hartung will officially start his tenure at the electric vehicle maker on June 1, 2025.

Tesla announced the addition of its new director in a post on social media platform X.

Jack Hartung’s Role

With Hartung’s addition, the Tesla Board will now have nine members. It’s been a while since the company added a new director. Prior to Hartung, the last addition to the Tesla Board was Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia back in 2022. As noted in a Reuters report, Hartung will serve on the Tesla Board’s audit committee. He will also retire from his position as president and chief strategy officer at Chipotle, and transition into a senior advisor’s role at the restaurant chain, next month.

Hartung has had a long career in the Mexican grill, joining Chipotle in 2002. He held several positions in the company, most recently serving as Chipotle’s President and Chief Strategy Officer. Tesla highlighted Hartung’s accomplishments in a post on its official account on X.

“Over the past 20+ years under Jack’s financial leadership, Chipotle has seen significant growth with over 3,700 restaurants today across the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. Jack was named ‘CFO of the Year’ by Orange County Business Journal and Best CFO in the restaurant category by Institutional Investor,” Tesla wrote in its post on X.

Advertisement

Tesla Board and Musk

Tesla is a controversial company with a controversial CEO, so it is no surprise that the Board of Directors tend to get flak as well. Two weeks ago, for example, Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm slammed The Wall Street Journal for publishing an article alleging that company directors had considered a search for a potential successor to Elon Musk. Denholm herself has also been criticized for offloading her TSLA shares.

More recently, news emerged suggesting that the Tesla Board of Directors had formed a special committee aimed at exploring a new pay package for CEO Elon Musk. The committee is reportedly comprised of Tesla board Chair Robyn Denholm and independent director Kathleen Wilson-Thompson, and they would be exploring alternative compensation methods for Musk’s contributions to the company.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Rivian stock rises as analysts boost price targets post Q1 earnings

Rivian impressed with smaller-than-expected losses & strong revenue, pushing analysts to raise price targets.

Published

on

(Credit: Rivian)

Rivian stock is gaining traction as Wall Street analysts raise price targets following the electric vehicle (EV) maker’s first-quarter earnings report. Despite a dip after the announcement, optimism surrounds Rivian’s cost control and upcoming lower-priced cars.

Last week, Rivian reported a better-than-expected Q1 gross profit, surpassing Wall Street’s forecasts with adjusted losses of $0.48 per share against expectations of $0.92 per share. The company also reported a revenue of $1.24 billion compared to the $1.01 billion anticipated.

However, the EV automaker cut its 2025 delivery forecast and capital spending due to President Donald Trump’s tariffs. It explained that it is “not immune to the impacts of the global trade and economic environment.” RIVN stock dropped nearly 6% post-earnings, closing at $12.72 per share.

Wall Street remains upbeat about Rivian, citing progress toward launching lower-priced vehicles in 2026 and effective cost management. On Monday, Stifel analyst Stephen Gengaro raised his RIVN price target to $18 from $16, maintaining a “Buy” rating. He highlighted Rivian’s “solid progress” toward key milestones.

Advertisement

Conversely, Bernstein’s Daniel Roeska gave RIVN a “Sell” rating. However, Roeska also lifted his Rivian price target to $7.05 from $6.10, acknowledging “better” Q1 results. He warned that profitability remains distant and hinges on multiple product launches by the decade’s end.

Overall, Wall Street’s average price target for RIVN climbed from $14.18 to $14.31, a modest 13-cent increase reflecting positive sentiment. About one-third of analysts covering Rivian rate it a Buy, compared to the S&P 500’s average Buy-rating ratio of 55%.

On Monday, Rivian stock rose 2.7% to $14.64, slightly trailing the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average, which gained 3.3% and 2.8%, respectively. The uptick may also stem from broader market gains tied to news of a temporary U.S.-China tariff suspension.

As Rivian navigates trade challenges and scales production at its Illinois factory, its Q1 performance and analyst support signal resilience. With lower-priced EVs on the horizon, Rivian’s strategic moves could bolster its position in the competitive EV market, offering investors cautious optimism for long-term growth.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla (TSLA) poised to hit $1 trillion valuation again amid reports of Trump China deal

TSLA stock was up about 8% at $322.56 per share on Monday’s premarket.

Published

on

tesla-model-y-giga-texas-logo
(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla shares (NASDAQ:TSLA) are on a tear on Monday’s premarket amidst reports that the United States and China have agreed to significantly roll back tariffs on each other’s goods for an initial 90-day period.

As of writing, the premarket price of TSLA shares suggests that the electric vehicle maker might end Monday with a $1 trillion valuation once more.

Tesla and China

TSLA stock was up about 8% at $322.56 per share on Monday’s premarket. As noted in a report from Barron’s, these prices suggest that the company could achieve a trillion-dollar valuation again, a level not seen since late February. Similar to Tesla, the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average were also up 2.8% and 2.1%, respectively, on Monday’s premarket.

The United States and China’s decision to roll back its tariffs would likely be appreciated by CEO Elon Musk. Despite working for the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and despite Tesla being least affected by the Trump administration’s tariffs due to its strong domestic supply chains in the United States, China, and Europe, Musk has noted that he is a supporter of non-predatory tariffs.

The United States and China’s Agreement

In a joint statement from the United States and China posted on the White House’s official website, the two countries agreed to lower reciprocal tariffs on each other by 115% for 90 days. This means that the United States will temporarily lower its overall tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30%, as noted in an ABC 12 report. China, on the other hand, will also lower its tariffs on American goods from 125% to 10%.

Advertisement

The talks were led by Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, as per the joint statement. Bessent shared his thoughts about the matter in a comment in Geneva. “The consensus from both delegations is neither side wants to be decoupled, and what have occurred with these very high tariffs … was an equivalent of an embargo, and neither side wants that. We do want trade. We want more balance in trade. And I think both sides are committed to achieving that,” he said. 

A spokesperson from China’s Commerce Ministry also shared a statement about the matter. As per the spokesperson, the deal was an “important step by both sides to resolve differences through equal-footing dialogue and consultation, laying the groundwork and creating conditions for further bridging gaps and deepening cooperation.”

Continue Reading

Trending