Ahead of Tesla's Big Shareholder Vote, Let's Re-Read the Judge's Opinion That Got Us Here

Tesla’s Annual Shareholder Meeting: A Drama-Filled Vote Ahead

In the lead-up to Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting on Thursday, there has been a significant amount of drama surrounding two key votes. The first pertains to the $56 billion compensation package awarded to Elon Musk in 2018, which was struck down by a Delaware Chancery Court judge earlier this year. The second vote concerns the company’s decision to change its incorporation location from Delaware to Texas.

A Call to Action for Tesla’s "Retail Army"

Tesla’s biggest boosters have been urging the company’s shareholders to vote in favor of both proposals, with a special emphasis on Musk’s compensation package. They argue that since Musk has met the targets agreed upon at the outset, he is entitled to this compensation. The company itself has taken to its CEO’s social media platform X, posting "A deal is a deal." However, it appears that almost no one is discussing the substance of Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick’s January ruling and its central theme: Musk holds so much sway over Tesla and its board of directors that there was no substantial negotiation when the company hammered out this deal with him in 2017-2018.

The Delaware Chancery Court Ruling

Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick’s 201-page opinion is a thorough but lucid read, making it essential for those interested in understanding the case. The document outlines the evidence presented and examines the agreement between Tesla and Musk. Rather than dismissing the judge as a "radical activist," it’s worth taking the time to understand her findings.

The Impact of the Vote

It remains unclear what tangible impact the outcome of either vote will have on Tesla or its shareholders. However, the fact that executives and employees are urging votes highlights the significance of this decision.

The Importance of Understanding the Ruling

Before making a decision, it’s crucial to review McCormick’s ruling. The 201-page opinion provides a comprehensive understanding of the case, allowing readers to grasp the substance behind the compensation package and its implications for Tesla.

Table of Contents

A Primer on Tornetta v. Musk Post-Trial Opinion

The document in question is titled "Tornetta v. Musk Post-Trial Opinion" by Sean O’Kane. This 201-page opinion is a thorough examination of the evidence presented in the case, making it an essential read for those interested in understanding the complexities of this decision.

Sean O’Kane’s Background

Sean O’Kane is a seasoned reporter with over a decade of experience covering the rapidly evolving business and technology of the transportation industry. His work has taken him to various outlets, including Bloomberg News, where he helped break stories about some of the most notorious EV SPAC flops.