4 ms·
From the Wall Street Journal this afternoon: "“What are they going to do if there is a judgment and he says, ‘Well, I’m still not going to buy it’?” said Zohar
by avalys 4y ago
From the Wall Street Journal this afternoon:
"“What are they going to do if there is a judgment and he says, ‘Well, I’m still not going to buy it’?” said Zohar Goshen, professor of transactional law at Columbia Law School. “They don’t really have tools to force him to go through with it. You don’t put people in jail because they don’t buy something.”"
https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-elon-musk-set-for-unprecedented-legal-battle-over-deal-collapse-11657404303?mod=hp_lead_pos1 https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-elon-musk-set-for-unpre...
- genocidicbunny 4y agoNo, but if the court orders it and he refuses, can that not be construed as contempt of court? People definitely go to jail for that.
- b112 4y agoThat's criminal, not civil court. Civil court works on fiscal, property to mitigate damage. If he is found to breach contract, a court could order seizure of assets (cash or property). There could be punitive damages assessed too, if his actions are seen as purposefully malign.
- phrz 4y agoAre you under the impression that judges presiding over civil cases cannot exercise their inherent power (in some jurisdictions) to jail those in (severe) contempt of court?
- b112 4y agoTo both replies, I agree contempt of court is a thing. I misspoke. What I mean is, the remedy for non-compliance with contracts, is fiscal, seizure, penalties of thus nature. The goal of civil court is not the state punishing, but instead, laying out compensation, for damages, to the harmed. There is no contempt of court for not paying these damages.
- z3phyr 4y ago> There is no contempt of court for not paying these damages. Then how does the civil court function? If nobody follows the courts order, the court is redundantly illegitimate.
- b112 4y agoThere is no ability to not comply. Seizure of assets is handled with financial institutions complying, and with the police backing up court seizures for physical assets. No one is going to assault a cop, or have their bank shut down due to non compliance. Where I am, what often happens is the damaged party has papers showing debt owed. It then becomes a colllection issue, sometimes, in some jurisdictions court takes an active role, in others, you have to do the work yourself. Eg, you have to find their bank, hire a sheriff(the seizure kind), and go get what is now "your stuff".
- encryptluks2 4y agoIf there was then a lot of America would become slaves by not paying their debts. There may be contempt here though if Elon does something to really piss off the courts.
- genocidicbunny 4y agoBut at that point it's not just non-compliance with a contract, its non-compliance with a court order.
- Retric 4y agoContempt of court is independent of the original cases criminal vs civil distinction. You can have criminal contempt in a civil case and criminal contempt in a civil case. The rules vary by state but in PA it’s civil contempt is used to force people to comply where criminal is punishment for disobedience.
- Volundr 4y agoWhy would you? Just seize and liquidate his Telsa stock, and pay it to Twitter. Done, no jail needed. Courts are entirely capable of seizing such assets.
- Victerius 4y agoHow would the Delaware Chancery seize $44B worth of Elon Musk's TSLA shares?
- smitty1110 4y agoWell, Tesla is a Delaware company[1], so I assume they have some leverage. 1: https://sec.report/CIK/0001318605 https://sec.report/CIK/0001318605
- baskethead 4y agoTesla didn't buy Twitter, Elon did.
- BbzzbB 4y agoMain chunk of his assets is Tesla stock, the Delaware incorporated company.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- baskethead 4y agoWho cares, why would Tesla be beholden for the actions of its largest shareholder? Musk is acting in a capacity completely outside of Tesla. To think that Tesla is somehow connected is disinformation.
- throwaway09223 4y agoThey wouldn't. Here's how it works: 1) The court would issue a judgement for Twitter, against Musk, for $44b. 2) Musk would either voluntarily pay it by selling his own assets, or he would refuse. If he refuses, then: 3) Twitter would go about seizing and selling Musk's assets, until they have raised funds to cover the $44b judgement. Twitter could levy whatever brokerage or account Musk uses to hold his shares. Somewhere there is an account which records the shares. Twitter would serve the entity managing the account with a levy, and order the shares be liquidated.
- lttlrck 4y agoIf he has a judgement against him, couldn't they make it very hard for him to do any further business in Delaware? That could be quite a handicap.
- dylan604 4y agoMeh, there's 49 other states that a new company can be chartered. Sure, they all different pros/cons, but those will be better than nothing at all.
- erosenbe0 4y agoTwitter's lawyers will pursue billions in remedies through every conceivable route, for decades if necessary.
- splintercell 4y ago> Twitter's lawyers will pursue billions in remedies through every conceivable route, for decades if necessary. No they won't. This is Twitter, not Oracle.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoLawyers are lawyers
- splintercell 4y agoYes, and they need to get paid in order to do something. Nobody really thinks that Elon Musk did something greatly terrible to Twitter by not buying it, this means Twitter will always get more crap from chasing Elon than not chasing him. It just happens to be that the payout will be big enough for them not care about the flak. BUT, if Elon fights back hard, Twitter will have to stop.
- outside1234 4y agoJust take $54B of Tesla stock and give it to Twitter That will certainly stop anyone from pulling this bullshit again!
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]