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

9 months ago

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issue for the electric vehicle maker back in January when Judge Kathaleen McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery rescinded Musk’s 2018 CEO Performance Award.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.

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.

Comments

Elon Musk

NYC Comptroller moves to sue Tesla for securities violations

Published

4 hours ago

on

April 1, 2025

By

MINISTÉRIO DAS COMUNICAÇÕES, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

New York City Comptroller Brad Lander is urging the NYC Law Department to sue Tesla for securities violations related to CEO Elon Musk’s involvement in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Lander said the basis for the potential litigation lies on “material misstatements from Tesla claiming that CEO Elon Musk spends significant time on the company and is highly active in its management, despite his helming the Trump Administration’s DOGE initiative.”

It is a common complaint amongst some Tesla shareholders who are less than enthusiastic about Musk’s involvement in DOGE. Some feel as if Musk is not concerned about Tesla, especially as the stock has dropped over 28 percent this year. However, Musk has continued to double down on his position within the U.S. government.

Nevertheless, Musk’s position in Tesla is still very apparent. He headed an All-Hands meeting just two weeks ago that showed his commitment to the company as he outlined future plans and even joked to employees that they should hold onto their stock.

However, Lander believes Musk’s involvement has hurt New York City pension systems, which have lost over $300 million so far this year. He said:

“In less than three months, Tesla stock has lost nearly 40% of its value, with losses over $300 million for the New York City pension systems. We have long expressed concerns that the Tesla board has failed to provide independent oversight, or to require that Musk – or someone else – serve as a full-time CEO.”

Lander went on to say that “material misstatements from Tesla misled investors about his role at the company,” stating this was his reasoning for calling on the Law Department to file securities litigation against the company.

He believes taking it to court will force changes and will return Tesla shares back to a level that will benefit pension systems in New York City:

“Shareholder litigation could force the changes in governance and leadership that Tesla needs, and help recover some of our pension systems’ losses. Otherwise, we may need to consider divestment.”

The pension systems would be able to pursue financial damages to cover losses and seek governance changes, it says.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla (TSLA) shares company-compiled Q1 2025 delivery consensus

Analysts are expecting the electric car maker to post 377,592 deliveries for Q1 2025.

Published

1 day ago

on

March 31, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) has released its Q1 2025 company-compiled delivery consensus of sell-side analysts. Based on Tesla’s release, it appears that analysts are expecting Tesla to post conservative vehicle delivery results for the first quarter.

Images of Tesla’s Q1 2025 company-compiled consensus were shared recently on social media. 

The Consensus

As could be seen in Tesla’s first quarter 2025 company-compiled vehicle delivery consensus, analysts are expecting the electric car maker to post 377,592 deliveries for Q1 2025. Analysts expect this number to be comprised of 351,893 Model 3/Model Y and 21,241 other models.

The company-compiled consensus also suggests that Tesla will see total deliveries of 1,851,001 vehicles this Full Year 2025. From this number, analysts expect 1,693,397 units of the Model 3 and Model Y and 145,162 units of Tesla’s other models.

The sources

Tesla’s company-compiled consensus was based on estimates from 27 firms. These include Daiwa, DB, Wedbush, Cowen, OpCo, Canaccord, Baird, Wolfe, Exane, GS, Evercore ISI, Barclays, PSC, Mizuho, BofA, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, Truist, UBS, Jefferies, Guggenheim, JPM, Redburn, Needham & Co, HSBC, Cantor Fitzgerald, and William Blair. 

Advertisement

FactSet expectations

As noted in an Investor’s Business Daily report, FactSet estimates suggest that Tesla will see vehicle deliveries of 407,900 units in Q1 2025. Such a number is quite optimistic considering that Tesla’s sales of its best-selling vehicle, the Model Y, were throttled during the quarter due to the company’s transition to the new Model Y. 

Beyond Q1 deliveries, Tesla’s first quarter vehicle delivery results could trigger revisions to the company’s full-year delivery and earnings forecasts. FactSet data shows Q1 earnings estimates hitting 48 cents per share, down from 57 cents in late January and 74 cents late last year. For 2025, analysts now see earnings per share climbing 13% to $2.74, a drop from $3.31 before the Q4 earnings release.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk clarifies Trump tariff effect on Tesla: “The cost impact is not trivial”

The U.S. President has stated that Elon Musk stayed silent and provided no input in the administration’s tariffs.

Published

5 days ago

on

March 27, 2025

By

MINISTÉRIO DAS COMUNICAÇÕES, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to implement a 25% tariff on non-U.S.-made vehicles starting next week would affect American electric car maker Tesla. 

This was confirmed by CEO Elon Musk in a recent post on social media platform X.

Musk and Trump

While Elon Musk works closely with the Trump administration due to his role in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the U.S. president has emphasized that the Tesla CEO never asks for favors. This was highlighted in his recent comments, when he stated that Elon Musk stayed silent and provided no input in the administration’s 25% auto tariffs.

When asked by reporters if the new tariffs would be good for Tesla, Trump noted that they may be “net neutral or they may be good.” The U.S. president also pointed to Tesla’s automotive plants in Fremont, California and Austin, Texas, which produce vehicles that are sold in the country. “Anybody that has plants in the United States — it’s going to be good for them,” Trump noted.

Tesla Affected

In a post on X, Elon Musk clarified that the Trump administration’s tariffs would affect the prices of vehicle parts that are sourced from other countries. This was a concern that Tesla previously outlined in a letter to the U.S. Trade Representative, which noted that even with “aggressive localization” of its supply chain, “certain parts and components are difficult or impossible to source within the United States.”

Advertisement

As per Musk in his recent post on X, the cost impact of the Trump administration’s tariffs is no joke. “To be clear, this will affect the price of parts in Tesla cars that come from other countries. The cost impact is not trivial,” Musk wrote in his post.

Potential Effects

Reactions to Musk’s comments from users of the social media platform were varied, with some speculating that the Trump auto tariffs could result in Teslas becoming more expensive in the United States. Despite this, the potential increases in Tesla’s vehicle prices might not be as notable as other cars, particularly those that are produced outside the country.

Continue Reading

Trending