Seeking compensation of up to $ 13 billion, shareholders claimed that Tesla’s $ 2.6 billion deal with SolarCity was tantamount to a “bailout, a bailout orchestrated” by Elon January of the plaintiff’s lawyer, Randy. Baron. While the court found that Musk “was more involved in the process than he should have been as a conflicting trustee,” he eventually ruled in favor of “technoking” in all respects. Shareholders still have the opportunity to appeal. At the time of the deal, Musk’s ties to Solar City were deep. The unprofitable solar company was co-founded and co-founded by Musk’s first cousins, Lyndon and Peter Reeve, and Musk was the largest shareholder and chairman of Solar City. “[The] “Tesla’s board has effectively considered the takeover and Elon has not stood in its way,” wrote Vice Chancellor Joseph Slaich. “Equally, if not more importantly, the superiority of the evidence reveals that Tesla paid a fair price – SolarCity was worth, at least, what Tesla paid for it,” Slights added. The verdict is a clear victory for Musk, but the court refused to force shareholders to pay his legal fees. Slights concluded that Tesla’s boss and Twitter suitor “probably could have avoided” the case from the beginning, “if he had just followed the basic rules of good corporate governance in conflict resolution”.
