Tesla Is Seeking $167 Million From Former Employee Accused of Sabotage (cnbc.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: Tesla is seeking more than $167 million in a lawsuit against former employee Martin Tripp, recent legal filings revealed. In the lawsuit, which was filed by the electric car maker in June, Tesla alleges that Tripp, a former process engineer, had illegally exported data and made false claims to reporters, among other things. Tripp had earlier claimed in a number of press interviews that Tesla engaged in poor manufacturing practices at its massive battery plant outside of Reno, Nevada, and that it may have used damaged battery modules in its Model 3 vehicles, posing a risk to drivers.

An interim case management report published on Nov. 27 reveals that Tripp's attorneys aim to depose Tesla CEO Elon Musk and more than 10 people involved with the company. Tesla has refused to make Musk available and sought to limit the number of people deposed by Tripp's defense team at the law firm Tiffany & Bosco. Tripp's lawyers wrote in that report: "Tesla has objected to Mr. Tripp's desire to take more than ten depositions... In this case, where Mr. Tripp is being sued for more than $167,000,000 and has asserted counterclaims against Tesla, more than ten depositions is certainly reasonable and appropriate." Tripp attorney Robert D. Mitchell said in an email to CNBC: "The purported damage amount claimed by Tesla relates to supposed dips in Tesla's stock price by virtue of the information Mr. Tripp provided to the press last summer." He characterized the damage claims as "absurd."

Comments

Not a smart move by Tesla

[haruchai]

What's to prevent Elon being sued for the amount he caused the stock to drop with his brain farts about "funding secured" that triggered the SEC going after him?

Re: Not a smart move by Tesla

[mrclevesque]

"but the tweet was obviously not serious and had no real world practicality"

Because they have to prove their case doesn't mean that's it's not true.

Re:Not a smart move by Tesla

[AmiMoJo]

The SEC settlement included compensation for people who lost money due to his tweets. I guess you need to contact the SEC for your cut, rather than having to sue Tesla yourself.

Re:Not a smart move by Tesla

[CaptainDork]

That matter is not within the scope of the lawsuit and is irrelevant. Depositions are not a fishing trip. Lawyers are present and can object when questions go off topic.

And in 'bailing attorneys' news:

[Rei]

From the article:

In early July, Tripp filed a formal complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging that Tesla made "material omissions and misstatements" to investors relating to its flawed manufacturing practices and handling of scrap at the Gigafactory. Tripp was represented by Meissner Associates in the whistleblower matter earlier, but is now representing himself, attorney Stuart Meissner told CNBC. Meissner declined to comment further. Tripp also declined requests for comment.

Meissner was warned repeatedly that his client was A) out of control, and B) a pathological liar. He appears to have come to the same conclusion.

His client has also apparently fled to Hungary, so then there's that.

Re:And in 'bailing attorneys' news:

[Rei]

Oh, and the point of a large figure (which Tripp obviously can't pay) has nothing to do with Tripp himself. The fun part will be discovery. Because anyone who might have been involved in telling him what data to get or otherwise communicating with him during the theft (Linette Lopez, I'm looking at you) would be soliciting a crime. Like, for example:

Peavy v. WFAA-TV Inc.: The media outlet was approached by an informant claiming that he had information about a local news issue. The media outlet refused to use the information without further documentation, encouraged the informant to obtain that, and advised him on the process (which amounted to an illegal wiretapping). The media outlet was found to have advised and encouraged the illegal acquisition of materials, which it then took possession of and published. The court characterized this as “undisputed participation.” The informant and the media outlet were found to be liable for the illegal acquisition.

Business Insider was valued at nearly $400M in 2015. If Linette was found to have been involved in the acquisition in any way - or in general failed any of the Bartnicki v. Vopper criteria:

1) The media outlet played no role in the illegal interception
2) The media received the information lawfully
3) The issue was a matter of public concern

Then they're criminally liable for the theft. And BI can't classify it as the actions of a "rogue employee", because when challenged earlier on the theft, BI came to Lopez's defense.

Also to watch out for:
  * People who took a short position in TSLA after learning of the story before it was published
  * People who already held a short position in TSLA who were involved in the chain of command on any decisions to work with Tripp and to publish

As I mentioned... discovery on this case is going to be loads of fun :) Especially because Tripp has so far proven so wreckless with how he's handled himself in this case (including posting a bunch of self-incriminating tweets - about revenge against Elon, claiming he doesn't know how to program, trying to hide his adafruit, scribd and stackoverflow accounts and then making hilariously bad excuses as for why he did so, chatting with famous Tesla shorts, etc - and then deleting them, as if they'd just disappear from the face of the Earth).

Re:And in 'bailing attorneys' news:

[Rei]

Oh, and fun fact about Business Insider:

Business Insider's CEO and Editor-In-Chief Henry Blodget is a Yale history graduate who previously worked on Wall Street until he was banned for life from the securities industry because of his violations of securities laws and subsequent civil trial, which ended with a $2 million fine plus a $2 million disgorgement and the permanent ban in 2003.

Pull on the thread....

Re:And in 'bailing attorneys' news:

[Rei]

their financial statements show a poorly managed company

Wall Street disagrees with you. TSLA keeps rising, while macros keep falling.

How are your investments looking these past few months? Odds are, pretty bloody terrible. Mine are doing amazing.

Re:And in 'bailing attorneys' news:

[Thelasko]

The fun part will be discovery. Because anyone who might have been involved in telling him what data to get or otherwise communicating with him during the theft (Linette Lopez, I'm looking at you) would be soliciting a crime.

IANAL but I don't think that's how it works. Reporters are exempt from laws barring the solicitation of secret information under the First Amendment. This was actually a big issue during the Obama Administration.

Making false statements about another person's character is a different matter. That is libel, and you can be sued for it if it damages another individual or company financially.

Re: Or Musk is the liar

[110010001000]

You can't even do that. You can show him the tweet where Musk calls some guy who rescued kids a "pedo" and fanboys will always come up with some justification. Just like some people didn't really believe that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme even after they were shown the proof. It is a combination of hero worship and self-delusion and techo-elitism that drives it.

Re:Sabotage???

[110010001000]

No one is sabotaging these companies. Enron claimed the same thing and so did Lehman Brothers. Short sellers short the stocks because they think they are overvalued. If a company fails it isn't due to short sellers.