Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Giuseppe Pampena, et al. v. Elon R.Musk

Date: 03-21-2026

Case Number: 22-cv-05937

Judge: Charles R. Breyer

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Aaron Arnzen, Francis Bottini, Mark Murphy, Albert Chang, Joseph Cotchett, Tyson Redenbarger, Caroline Yuen, Elle Lewis,

Defendant's Attorney: Steve Broome, Alex Spiro, Ellyde Thompson, Emily Couture, Jesse Bernestein, Jon Feder, Joseph Sarles, Alex Bergjans, Mike Lifrak, Nathan Archibald, Phillip Jobe, Rebecca Arno, Steve Kelemen

Description:
San Francisco, California, commercial litigation lawyers represented the Plaintiffs on a class action securities fraud theory.

Lead Plaintiffs Steve Garrett, Nancy Price, John Garrett,
and Brian Belgrave (“Plaintiffs”) bring this securities class
action against Defendant Elon Musk (“Defendant”) on behalf
of all persons and entities who sold Twitter, Inc. (“Twitter”)
stock from May 13, 2022 to October 4, 2022 (the “Class Period”). Plaintiffs argue that Defendant violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by making multiple misstatements to artificially depress the price of Twitter stock and to pressure
Twitter to lower the price Defendant would have to pay to acquire it.

n April 25, 2022, Twitter entered into an agreement (the “Merger Agreement”) to be acquired by an entity wholly-owned by Defendant for $54.20 per share, resulting in a total transaction value of approximately $44 billion. First Am. Compl. (“FAC”) (dkt. 31) ¶ 85. Below, the Court summarizes:
(1) the events leading to the Merger Agreement between Defendant and Twitter; (2) Defendant's financing for the deal;
and (3) the alleged misstatements Defendant made during the Class Period.

Investors claimed Musk made false statements and took actions (e.g., regarding bot counts) to create, and subsequently profit from, a dip in Twitter's share price in 2022.
Outcome:
Plaintiffs' verdict for between $3 and $8 per stock per days.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Giuseppe Pampena, et al. v. Elon R.Musk?

The outcome was: Plaintiffs' verdict for between $3 and $8 per stock per days.

Which court heard Giuseppe Pampena, et al. v. Elon R.Musk?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco County), CA. The presiding judge was Charles R. Breyer.

Who were the attorneys in Giuseppe Pampena, et al. v. Elon R.Musk?

Plaintiff's attorney: Aaron Arnzen, Francis Bottini, Mark Murphy, Albert Chang, Joseph Cotchett, Tyson Redenbarger, Caroline Yuen, Elle Lewis,. Defendant's attorney: Steve Broome, Alex Spiro, Ellyde Thompson, Emily Couture, Jesse Bernestein, Jon Feder, Joseph Sarles, Alex Bergjans, Mike Lifrak, Nathan Archibald, Phillip Jobe, Rebecca Arno, Steve Kelemen.

When was Giuseppe Pampena, et al. v. Elon R.Musk decided?

This case was decided on March 21, 2026.