Twitter says Elon Musk's argument to delay trial "fails at every level"
Twitter on Monday filed a reply to Elon Musk's Friday response to the company's lawsuit against the billionaire, saying Musk's request to delay a trial "fails at every level."
Why it matters: A Tuesday hearing at a Delaware Chancery Court will determine whether the trial moves forward in September.
- Twitter requested an expedited trial in a lawsuit filed against Musk last Tuesday.
Details: In the filing Monday, Twitter argued that Musk's response doesn't dispute that Twitter’s lawsuit meets the standards for expedition.
- Citing historical legal precedents, Twitter argues that cases like the one pertaining to its lawsuit “are routinely expedited” because they “readily fit within the standards for expedition.”
- "The only remaining condition — shareholder approval — is expected to be satisfied before the September trial Twitter requests. Conclusions aside, Musk offers no reason to think discovery must be so expansive that a trial must wait until next year," the filing said.
- Twitter also reiterated that Musk's problem with the number of spam accounts on Twitter "is a contractually irrelevant sideshow that Musk wants to use to disparage Twitter and prolong this litigation."
- In its lawsuit against Musk filed last week, Twitter called Musk's exit strategy to use Twitter's bot problem as a justification to pull out of his $44 billion deal "a model of hypocrisy," saying Musk initially said he wanted to buy the company to help fix its spam issues.
The big picture: The filing marks the latest development in a messy legal battle between the tech giant and Musk, ahead of what's likely to be an even messier trial.
- Musk initially offered to buy Twitter at $54.20 per share, a premium to its trading price at the time and an even bigger premium today, in April.
- As the markets collapsed in the weeks following, Musk began to backpedal from the deal, claiming the company hadn't disclosed enough information about the number of bots on its platform — an argument legal experts say won't hold up in court.