> Delaware law allows defendants to shift the burden of proof under the entire fairness standard where the transaction was approved by a fully informed vote of the majority of the minority stockholders. And here, Tesla conditioned the compensation plan on a majority-of-the-minority vote. But the defendants were unable to prove that the stockholder vote was fully informed because the proxy statement inaccurately described key directors as independent and misleadingly omitted details about the process.
Even before this decision he already asked for 25% voting control a couple of weeks ago and threatened to start a competing company (for AI self driving and such) if Tesla doesn't give it to him.
TheCaptain4815|2 years ago
LegionMammal978|2 years ago
> Delaware law allows defendants to shift the burden of proof under the entire fairness standard where the transaction was approved by a fully informed vote of the majority of the minority stockholders. And here, Tesla conditioned the compensation plan on a majority-of-the-minority vote. But the defendants were unable to prove that the stockholder vote was fully informed because the proxy statement inaccurately described key directors as independent and misleadingly omitted details about the process.
georgeg23|2 years ago
gumby|2 years ago
https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-seeks-25-voting-shar...
Kimm0n0|2 years ago
legaleagles|2 years ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect|2 years ago
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39196390
phantomathkg|2 years ago
CoastalCoder|2 years ago
leetgirl83|2 years ago
NINE SHARES OF TESLA STOCK.
Kimm0n0|2 years ago
throwup238|2 years ago
firecall|2 years ago
legaleagles|2 years ago
[deleted]