New York: In the ongoing saga over Elon Musk’s compensation package, the attorneys responsible for voiding his $56 billion payout as excessive have now requested an unprecedented $6 billion legal fee. This astronomical sum, payable in Tesla stock, has sparked controversy and drawn sharp criticism from Musk himself.
In a filing with the Court of Chancery in Delaware, the three law firms involved defended their fee request, citing its linkage to the benefit accrued by Tesla from the return of Musk’s pay package. They emphasized that the fee structure ensures no direct financial burden on Tesla’s balance sheet, as it is tied to the return of 266 million shares to the electric vehicle maker.
Elon Musk swiftly condemned the requested fee as “criminal,” expressing his disdain on his X platform. Despite Musk’s strong objections, neither Tesla nor Musk’s attorney has provided an immediate response to the fee request.
The legal battle stems from a lawsuit filed by shareholder Richard Tornetta in 2018, which led to a Delaware judge nullifying Musk’s controversial pay package earlier this year. While Judge Kathaleen McCormick deemed Musk’s pay “unfathomable” in her ruling, the pending decision on the exorbitant legal fee remains in her hands.
As the case unfolds, it raises broader questions about attorney compensation in shareholder litigation, particularly in cases of significant financial stakes. While Musk’s pay package controversy has drawn attention to Delaware’s legal landscape, it also underscores the complexities of corporate governance and executive compensation in the modern era.
