The Delaware Court of Chancery, in In re Tesla Motors, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, C.A. No. 12711-VCS (consol.), memo. op. (Del. Ch. Feb. 4, 2020), rejected defendants’ argument that a presumption of inherent coercion cannot apply to a controlling stockholder after discovery, and that evidence of coercion is required to survive a motion to dismiss.

NEW:  K&L Gates discusses the decision in Transactions Involving Controlling Stockholder as a Result of Actual or Inherent Coercion are Subject to Entire Fairness Standard of Review.

Morris James discusses the decision in Chancery: Control and the Doctrine of Inherent Coercion Preclude Summary Judgment Based on Disinterested Stockholder Approval.

Legal Newsline discusses the decision in Tesla shareholder lawsuit against Elon Musk will proceed.

Frank Reynolds discusses the decision in Chancery: Tesla investors need only prove Musk had coercive influence ability in SolarCity deal.

DealLawyers.com discusses the decision in Controllers: The Heat is On in Delaware for Minority Shareholders.

Eric Talley, Anne Tucker, & Jamie Brumberger discuss the decision in Tesla, SolarCity, and Inherent Coercion

Alison Frankel discusses the decision in Elon Musk’s liability for Tesla’s SolarCity deal could come down to a question of his control.

$$$ Law360 discusses the decision in Chancery Puts $2.6B Tesla-SolarCity Deal Suit On Trial Track.