Musk Twitter Lawsuit: Jury Finds Claims Damaged Investors

0 comments

Elon Musk Found Liable for Misleading Twitter Investors

A jury in San Francisco, California, has found Elon Musk liable for misleading investors regarding Twitter, now known as X, in the lead-up to his $44 billion acquisition of the social media company in 2022. The verdict, issued on Friday, March 20, 2026, could result in damages reaching up to $2.6 billion according to CNBC.

Details of the Lawsuit and Verdict

The class action lawsuit, Pampena v. Musk, was initially filed in October 2022, shortly after Musk completed the purchase of Twitter for $54.20 per share. Investors alleged that Musk intentionally misled them about the number of bot and spam accounts on the platform, and about his intentions to complete the acquisition as reported by the Associated Press.

The jury determined that Musk’s public statements regarding Twitter’s user metrics and his potential withdrawal from the $44 billion deal were intentionally misleading, artificially lowering the stock price between May and October 2022 by roughly $3 to $8 per share according to BBC News.

Musk’s Response and Potential Appeal

Musk’s legal team, Quinn Emanuel, stated they view the verdict as a “bump in the road” and intend to appeal the decision. They argued that the jury found both for and against the plaintiffs and did not find a fraudulent scheme as reported by CNBC.

Impact on Investors and X

Attorneys for the plaintiffs emphasized the importance of the verdict for average investors, including those with 401ks, pension funds, and those working in essential services. Joseph Cotchett, an attorney for the plaintiffs, stated, “This is a great example of what you cannot do to the average investor” according to CNBC.

Since acquiring Twitter, Musk has rebranded the company as X and merged it with his artificial intelligence company xAI and his reusable rocket manufacturer, SpaceX as reported by CNBC.

Further Developments

The amount of damages awarded to investors is still being calculated. The case highlights the legal risks associated with public statements made by corporate leaders, particularly during significant transactions according to Reuters.

Related Posts

Leave a Comment