SolarCity Corporation SCTY

Sort: Most Popular  ·  Most Recent

1. Pending (On Appeal)In Re Tesla Motors, Inc. Stockholder Litigation
   Court of Chancery of Delaware  Case No. 12711-VCS

   Breach of Fiduciary DutyConflicted TransactionCorporate GovernanceELON MUSKEntire FairnessFraudMergers and AcquisitionsShareholder Derivative SuitSolarCityTeslaTesla Securities ActionsTesla Solar

   This consolidated stockholder derivative action, filed in September 2016 in the Delaware Court of Chancery, challenged Tesla Motors' $2.6 billion acquisition of SolarCity Corporation as a conflicted transaction that amounted to a bailout of a struggling company at Tesla shareholders' expense. The central allegation was that Elon Musk, who held a significant stake in both Tesla and SolarCity and whose cousins Lyndon and Peter Rive ran SolarCity, orchestrated the merger to rescue SolarCity from financial distress while using Tesla as the vehicle to do so. Plaintiffs alleged that Musk and the Tesla board members who approved the deal breached their fiduciary duties to Tesla shareholders. The litigation proceeded through years of discovery and motion practice before proceeding to a ten-day trial before Vice Chancellor Joseph R. Slights III in July 2021. The trial featured extensive testimony and expert analysis on whether SolarCity was financially distressed at the time of the acquisition, whether the deal price was fair, and whether Tesla's board acted independently given Musk's influence over it. Key witnesses included financial experts debating the valuation of SolarCity and the terms of the transaction. Vice Chancellor Slights issued his post-trial decision in April 2022, ruling that while Musk was a conflicted controlling stockholder, the acquisition was entirely fair to Tesla shareholders and judgment was entered in favor of the defendants. Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court in May 2022.

2. SolarCity Corporation v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District
   Arizona District Court  Case No. 2:15-cv-00374-DLR

   AntitrustElectric UtilityMonopolizationRenewable EnergySherman ActSolar EnergyState Action Doctrine

   SolarCity Corporation, represented by Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP (partners William Isaacson and Karen Dunn), filed this antitrust suit in March 2015 in the District of Arizona against Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District before Judge Douglas Rayes. SolarCity alleged that SRP, the Phoenix-area electric utility holding monopoly power over electricity distribution, implemented punitive rate structures specifically targeting customers who installed rooftop solar panels, designed to eliminate the economic viability of residential solar and protect SRP's generation monopoly. SRP moved to dismiss, arguing it was exempt from antitrust liability as a state actor. SolarCity filed an amended complaint in May 2015 and the case proceeded through discovery. The case raised novel antitrust questions about the obligations of regulated electric utilities under Sherman Act Section 2 and the state action doctrine.

3. SolarCity Corporation v. Seaboard Solar Operations LLC et al
   Massachusetts District Court  Case No. 1:15-cv-13406

4. Fernando Murrain v. Tesla, Inc.
   Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara  Case No. 18CV334861

   Tesla Worker RightsWillful Failure To Pay Arbitration Fees

5. Morris v. SolarCity Corp.
   California Northern District Court  Case No. 3:15-cv-05107

6. SolarCity Corporation v. Doria
   California Southern District Court  Case No. 3:16-cv-03085

   Whistleblowers

7. Ramirez v. Tesla Energy
   Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino  Case No. CIVDS2013540

   Tesla SolarWater Damage

8. Bao v. SolarCity Corporation
   California Northern District Court  Case No. 5:14-cv-01435

   Tesla Securities Actions

9. Kevin Demattio v. Solarcity Corporation
   Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles  Case No. BC490482

10. United Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Tesla, Inc. et al
    Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County  Case No. 604514/2020

    Fire DamageTesla Solar

11. Kolibas Sean v. Solar City Corporation
    Supreme Court of New Jersey  Case No. MID-L-007631-19

    Tesla Solar

12. Ferrari v. SolarCity
    Delaware District Court  Case No. 1:18-cv-01813-MN

    Tesla Worker Rights

13. Tuhin Roy v. Solarcity Corporation
    Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco  Case No. CSM-13-844123

14. People of the State of California v. SolarCity
    Superior Court of California, County of Contra Costa  Case No. CIVMSC13-00751

    Tesla Worker Rights

15. Tim Armitage v. Tesla Energy Operations
    Superior Court of California, County of San Diego  Case No. 37-2019-00030666-CU-BC-NC

    Tesla SolarWater Damage

16. Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club v. Tesla Energy Operations, Inc. et al
    Superior Court of California, County of Kern  Case No. BCV-20-101987

    Fire DamageTesla Solar

17. Garcia et al v. SolarCity Corp. et al
    Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo  Case No. 18CIV03640

18. United Services Automobile Associat v. Solarcity Corporation
    Superior Court of California, County of Alameda  Case No. RG18916359

    Fire DamageTesla Solar

19. Whitworth v. SolarCity Corp.
    California Northern District Court  Case No. 3:16-cv-01540

    Tesla SolarTesla Worker Rights

20. Cogenra Solar, Inc. et al v. SolarCity Corporation et al
    California Northern District Court  Case No. 4:16-cv-05481