Your current location is:{Current column} >>Text
Musk's $44 billion Twitter buyout challenged in shareholder lawsuit By Reuters
{Current column}87People have watched
Introduction© Reuters. Elon Musk arrives at the In America: An Anthology of Fashion themed Met Gala at the Metro ...
© Reuters. Elon Musk arrives at the In America: An Anthology of Fashion themed Met Gala at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City,Which traders on mt4 are legitimate New York, U.S., May 2, 2022. REUTERS/Andrew KellyBy Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) -Elon Musk and Twitter Inc (NYSE:TWTR) were sued on Friday by a Florida pension fund seeking to stop Musk from completing his $44 billion takeover of the social media company before 2025.

In a proposed class action filed in Delaware Chancery Court, the Orlando Police Pension Fund said Delaware law forbade a quick merger because Musk had agreements with other big Twitter shareholders, including his financial adviser Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) and Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, to support the buyout.
The fund said those agreements made Musk, who owns 9.6% of Twitter, the effective "owner" of more than 15% of the company's shares, requiring a three-year delay in the merger unless two-thirds of shares not "owned" by him granted approval.
Morgan Stanley owns about 8.8% of Twitter shares and Dorsey owns 2.4%. Musk also runs electric car company Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) Inc, leads The Boring Co and SpaceX, and is the world's richest person according to Forbes magazine.
It was not immediately clear from the lawsuit how Twitter shareholders might be harmed absent a three-year delay.
Twitter and its board, including Dorsey and Chief Executive Parag Agrawal, were also named as defendants.
Twitter declined to comment. Lawyers for Musk and the Florida pension fund did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Musk's proposed takeover of Twitter would be one of the largest leveraged buyouts ever.
On Thursday, he said he had raised around $7 billion, including from sovereign wealth funds and friends in Silicon Valley, to help fund a takeover.
Musk had no financing lined up when he announced plans to buy Twitter last month.
The lawsuit seeks to delay the merger's closing until at least 2025, declare that Twitter directors breached their fiduciary duties, and recoup legal fees and costs.
The case is Orlando Police Pension Fund v Twitter Inc et al, Delaware Chancery Court, No. 2022-0396.
Statement: The content of this article does not represent the views of FTI website. The content is for reference only and does not constitute investment suggestions. Investment is risky, so you should be careful in your choice! If it involves content, copyright and other issues, please contact us and we will make adjustments at the first time!
Tags:
Related articles
VW pledges to double down on EVs in China, urges extension of NEV tax breaks By Reuters
{Current column}SHANGHAI (Reuters) -A senior Volkswagen AG (OTC:) China executive reiterated on Saturday the German ...
Read moreJareth Mun develops QT Capital's AI investment strategy in Asia.
{Current column}In 2017, Jareth Mun returned to Asia with a clear mission: to build an investment management firm th ...
Read moreRotabit Applies Advanced Network Technology
{Current column}Rotabit, a trading platform specializing in cryptocurrency markets, has implemented advanced network ...
Read more
Popular Articles
- PayPal stock cut at Edward Jones, removed from Focus List after 'weaker' results By
- Advance Fee Scams
- Canadian Driver’s License Leak: What Happened & How to Protect Yourself
- GlobeInvestFX required me to pay a $980 account clearance payment
- Gold snaps 3
- ApexTred informed me a $1,950 security clearance must be paid before I can get my money.
Latest articles
-
Tesla succession plan, vehicle demand in focus at annual meet By Reuters
-
Advance Fee Scams
-
TMGM successfully hosted two top
-
15 Trusted Travel Booking Sites for 2025
-
Tesla shares sink as Musk's sales push by price cuts hurts margins By Reuters
-
Only with Lucrative Trades would I face a $1,950 “transaction approval surcharge”