Twitter v. Elon Musk Court Filing by Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, July 12, 2022 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 25 of 31. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS VIII. Defendants purport to terminate the merger agreement B. Twitter’s representations in its SEC filings supply no basis for termination 131. Nor can defendants show that Twitter has made any representation or collection of representations the inaccuracy of which is “reasonably likely to result in” a Company Material Adverse Effect. They do not even try. Notwithstanding that defendants have received mountains of information regarding Twitter’s processes, far beyond what they are entitled to under the merger agreement, their termination notice asserts only that “[p]reliminary analysis by Mr. Musk’s advisors” of the vast data set Twitter provided to Musk after signing “causes Mr. Musk to strongly believe” Twitter’s reported estimates have been inaccurate. Ex. 3 at 6. Musk’s claimed “belie[f]” is of course no proof of misrepresentation, much less of a Company Material Adverse Effect — which can be established only by clearing an extraordinarily high bar that is nowhere in sight here. Continue reading here

Twitter

Too Long; Didn't Read

Questions about cloud security? Get answers here.

Musk publicly claimed Twitter's SEC filings inaccurate, while unable to provide evidence in court

Too Long; Didn't Read

People Mentioned

Company Mentioned

Legal PDF

About Author

TOPICS

Languages

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...

Musk publicly claimed Twitter's SEC filings inaccurate, while unable to provide evidence in court

Too Long; Didn't Read

People Mentioned

Company Mentioned

About Author

TOPICS

Languages

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...

RELATED STORIES