Chasing Elon: The Lawyer Lining Up Elon Musk For A Twitter Fight in Ripper Letter

Chasing Elon: The Lawyer Lining Up Elon Musk For A Twitter Fight in Ripper Letter 2

Elon Musk’s Twitter purchase has been a case study in drama, legal threats and ascerbic Tweets and Firings. But now a lawyer representing fired Twitter employees is spoiling for a major fight with the world’s richest man.

Chasing Elon: The Lawyer Lining Up Elon Musk For A Twitter Fight in Ripper Letter 3

Akiva Cohen, (right) a partner at Kamerman, Uncyk, Soniker & Klein, alleges Musk has not paid the severance money he promised and has sent a ferociously written demand letter to “Chief Twit” Musk and Acting General Counsel Alex Spiro.

As Cohen writes in a letter posted to his own Twittyer account, “you’ve been attempting to tap-dance your way out of Twitter’s binding obligations to its employees.”

Cohen, a seasoned commercial litigation expert, gave a 7 December deadline to Twitter to fulfil its obligations, failing which a raft of arbitrations will be unleashed.

His letter was posted to – of course – Twitter.

Chasing Elon: The Lawyer Lining Up Elon Musk For A Twitter Fight in Ripper Letter 4

“Not only will you lose on the merits,  but even if you somehow won the victory would be pyrrhic: Twitter will pay far more in attorneys’ fees and arbitration costs than it could possibly ‘save’ in severance due our clients.”

And then he rubs it in, “And to be clear Elon, you will lose, and you know it.” He noted that the severance detailed in the merger agreement under which Musk took over the company is far less than what had been offered since the actual layoffs took place.

Or you can double own on breaking your word and screwing over your employees as they head into the holidays. If so, deposing you will be a joy, and you should be aware that Washington law, among others that will apply, will allow us to obtain an award against you, personally, and not just Twitter the company.

Akiva Cohen

Cohen further points to Musk’s likely argument that the severance detailed in the merger agreement is unenforceable since the merger agreement has a clause — 6.9(e) — that there are no third-party beneficiaries to the agreement.

Cohen’s response to that argument is clear:

But even were that somehow a viable strategy, you’d still lose. The doctrine of promissory estoppel means that Twitter can’t promise its employees a severance package to get then to stay at the company through the merger, and then renege on that promise once they do.

Your insistence on including “no third party beneficiaries: clause in Section 6.9(e) suggests that you were always planning on playing this game, so we’ll be including a cause of action for fraud in our arbitration demands — and seeking punitive damages on top of pre- and post-judgment interest.

Worse, we’ve received anecdotal information from our clients and others that indicates the layoff was conducted in violation of FEHA and other anti-discrimination laws. Please provide us by Wednesday the 7th with a demographic breakdown of the individuals Twitter laid off.

Or you can double own on breaking your word and screwing over your employees as they head into the holidays. If so, deposing you will be a joy, and you should be aware that Washington law, among others that will apply, will allow us to obtain an award against you, personally, and not just Twitter the company.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top