Rejection of Tesla Class Action Shareholder Suit

Just did! Shared to my fb wall.

What is the point of this? Can't we opt out of the class?

Very definition of frivolous lawsuit. We should sue these headline chasers for any hit to TSLA stock caused by their unsubstantiated claims. (Note: I say headline chasers as opposed to ambulance chasers because I've yet to hear to here of a serious injury in a Model S)

We have a closing to this case


Judge Slams Brakes on Tesla Shareholder Suit | The Recorder



Long story short, Judge's reaction was this:





"I'm at a total—I mean total—loss understanding the basis for this lawsuit," Breyer said.

Not to mention that since that stupid class action suit was launched, the share price has gone up by a factor of 2 or 3...

But I gotta say, wasn't that judge a bit naive? The basis of the lawsuit was they were hoping to get a lenient judge and make a quick buck.

Was anyone able to read that Recorder​ article? Behind a paywall for me.

AudubonB said:

Was anyone able to read that Recorder​ article? Behind a paywall for me.

Click to expand...

The link worked for me. I guess they removed the paywall now.

http://www.therecorder.com/home/id=...2617072607&curindex=2&slreturn=20140826205152

Was a fun read...

We all remember the large number of headlines spouting off about this class-action lawsuit back when it first came out in Oct. 2012. It was an FUD party for the shorts and all the media outlets reported it with sensational headlines.

Who wants to bet that the resultant throwing out of this lawsuit as frivolous will barely be noticeable in next week's financial reportings?

pz1975 said:

Who wants to bet that the resultant throwing out of this lawsuit as frivolous will barely be noticeable in next week's financial reportings?

Click to expand...

I must have missed it. What's the date for TSLA 3Q financial results?

Friendly Google

Actually, Rob, I was using Google to access the article. So I thought. Is there some secret decoder ring that I don't have?

AudubonB said:

Actually, Rob, I was using Google to access the article. So I thought. Is there some secret decoder ring that I don't have?

Click to expand...

Usually when you google for the article, and click on it, it gets you through paywalls. Maybe it is your ip or something.


Here is teh article:

SAN FRANCISCO — The accusations centered on electric car fires, but it was the securities suit against Tesla Motors Inc. that crashed and burned Friday in federal court.
Tesla executives didn't cover up fire risks posed by batteries in the company's luxury Model S cars, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said, dismissing the complaint without leave to amend. Nor were company statements lauding the cars' safety false, despite three car fires reported in 2013.
"I'm at a total—I mean total—loss understanding the basis for this lawsuit," Breyer said.
Extreme circumstances, including a 100 MPH crash, caused the fires at the heart of the litigation—not a battery defect. In fact, Breyer said, Tesla cars seem to have contributed to the survival of the cars' occupants. In each case, the victims walked away without serious injuries before the cars ignited.
"Tesla said that this car was found to be one of the safest cars ever developed," Breyer said. "That seems to be the case. There's no evidence that that's not true."
Plaintiffs attorney Matthew Tuccillo, a partner in Pomerantz's New York office, countered that Tesla CEO Elon Musk didn't disclose a fire during a factory test "that spun wildly out of control and required 23 first responders."
But Breyer remained unconvinced. "How many fires have occurred with this very dangerous battery" that were not caused by crashes or road debris striking the battery in the car's undercarriage, he asked.
"The answer during the class period and since is zero," said Tesla attorney David Siegel, a partner in Irell & Manella's Los Angeles office. "That risk has never realized."
Tuccillo also accused Musk of misleading shareholders when answering questions about a car battery that ignited in Washington in October 2013. Musk already knew of a second battery fire, but failed to mention it, Tucillo said. But Breyer brushed that off, saying federal securities law doesn't require executives to provide "a stream of consciousness disgorgement about everything everyone knows about everything."

Click to expand...

But Breyer brushed that off, saying federal securities law doesn't require executives to provide "a stream of consciousness disgorgement about everything everyone knows about everything."

Click to expand...

I think I might like this Breyer.

brianman said:

I must have missed it. What's the date for TSLA 3Q financial results?

Click to expand...

Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant financial reportings in general, as in financial news.

Great stuff.

Matthew Tuccillo, a partner in Pomerantz's New York office:


And judge Breyer (one of my new heroes):

Sweet small victory

evme said:

We have a closing to this case

Judge Slams Brakes on Tesla Shareholder Suit | The Recorder

"I'm at a total—I mean total—loss understanding the basis for this lawsuit," Breyer said.

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the link. Maybe this lawsuit was frivolous, but the victory is sooo sweet.

I recall that I phoned the Pomerantz offices (their number was listed on the notice they published asking for other owners to join the action) and left a three-minute harangue message on how stupid, baseless and deceitful the lawsuit was. I did that just so someone from the office would have to waste three minutes of their life listening to it. This was soon after I purchased the car so I guess my emotions may have been somewhat elevated.

now, I feel like: "Mwwwahahahahahahaha!!!!!"

Ames said:

The link worked for me. I guess they removed the paywall now.

http://www.therecorder.com/home/id=...2617072607&curindex=2&slreturn=20140826205152

Was a fun read...

Click to expand...

I could not read it. They want me to register/sign up.