Filing: Elon Musk's lawyers say Twitter is unfairly pushing for a “warp speed” four-day trial in September and ask for a court date in February 2023 or later

Elon Musk's lawyers say Twitter Inc. officials are unfairly pushing for a “warp speed” trial over claims …

Bloomberg 2022-07-17 Jef Feeley

Context & Ripple Effects

Musk’s request to move the case into 2023 set up an immediate fight over whether Twitter could force a rapid resolution. The court soon rejected that timetable in favor of an expedited five-day October trial, making the scheduling dispute the first consequential decision in the litigation.

The later record shows how tightly the timetable shaped both sides’ leverage: Musk’s deposition was set for early October ahead of the scheduled trial, before the court ultimately paused the proceeding pending a closing deadline.

First-order effects

Twitter faced Musk’s bid to delay adjudication for months, while Musk sought more time before a court hearing on Twitter’s claims.
The Delaware Court of Chancery’s subsequent October trial order gave Twitter the accelerated process it had sought rather than Musk’s proposed 2023 schedule.

Second-order effects

The accelerated calendar compressed discovery and put Musk’s deposition on the critical path to trial, as reflected in the later October 6–7 deposition schedule.
A rapid trial date increased pressure on both Twitter and Musk to resolve the transaction before the court reached the merits; the later pause was explicitly tied to a closing deadline.

Third-order effects

The sequence illustrates how expedited scheduling can become a central source of leverage in contested corporate transactions, with the court’s timetable shaping bargaining before a merits ruling.
For Twitter and Musk, procedural decisions—not only the underlying allegations—determined whether the dispute moved toward trial or transaction completion.

The trend: Contested deal litigation is increasingly defined by accelerated court calendars that force negotiating and discovery decisions onto the same short timeline.

Discussion

@meghanbobrowsky Meghan Bobrowsky on x
From filing: “With the sense of humor of a bot, Twitter claims that Musk is damaging the company with tweets like a Chuck Norris meme and a poop emoji. Twitter ignores that Musk is its second largest shareholder with a far greater economic stake than the entire Twitter board.”
@zerohedge @zerohedge on x
Second Friday night bomb in a row from the Musk legal team
@davidlaz David Lazarus on x
He seems determined to ruin the company https://twitter.com/...
@marypcbuk Mary Branscombe on x
it's like the court schedule is on autopilot https://twitter.com/...
@anildash Anil on x
The fundamental flaw of most social platforms is a tech mindset that thinks the hard part is managing content, when the hard part is actually managing discontent.
@martinsfp @martinsfp on x
Oh *they're* the ones acting in bad faith. Riiiiiiiiight. https://twitter.com/...
@reuterslegal @reuterslegal on x
Judge Kathaleen McCormick will hear arguments on July 19 for Twitter's request for a September trial in its lawsuit seeking to hold Elon Musk, the world's richest person, to his $44 billion deal for the social media platform, according to a court filing https://www.reuters.com/..…
@bramcohen Bram Cohen🌱 on x
The narrative that Elon is trying to weasel out of buying Twitter because the price went down doesn't fit the data. The price went up after there were hints that he might buy it and went down to its former price after, so it seems the price is following him.
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
How the Musk-Twitter showdown ends. 1. Twitter's board has a duty to max return 2. Twitter, the firm, doesn't want Musk 3. Musk doesn't want Twitter Musk offered $54/share. Current price: $37. Negotiation begins by demanding $17/share for Musk to walk https://theatlantic.com/...
@kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
Reminder that Twitter asked for things to be expedited, hoping to wrap this all up by late October (would have been ambitious regardless I think...) https://twitter.com/...
@proferictalley Eric Talley on x
When you're holding an out of the money option, it always makes sense to try to extend the expiry date.
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
4 cont.: ... There's just one problem. Twitter says it repeatedly reached out to Musk and his representatives about an employee retention program. Musk didn't seem to care. At the town hall, Musk was noncommittal about ppl leaving, since costs needed to come down. https://twitter…
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
5. This case was randomly assigned to to Chancellor McCormick, who in a similar case last year, ordered a buyer to go through with a merger even after COVID and the torpedoing of the deal's financing. Buyer was forced to go through with the acquisition! https://www.businesswire.c…
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
3. As many ppl have pointed out, Musk's second claim—that Twitter won't give him sufficient information about bots—is a little more plausible. But Twitter's response is compelling. Weeks after the agreement was inked, and they still sent over massive amounts of customer data. htt…
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
In my younger days (uh, April), I thought a Twitter power-user would be a fun Twitter steward. Welp. Market crashed, and Musk changed his mind. Today, his power tweets are an artillery of petards by which Twitter may hoist him in court. He's in trouble. https://www.theatlantic.co…
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
Elon Musk is in deep trouble here, for 5 reasons. 1. He's already arguably violated the disparagement clause in Section 6.8 of the contract by criticizing Twitter (see: poop tweets, etc). It's hard to avail yourself of a contract's protections if you're already in violation. http…
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
2. As many people have pointed out, Musk's primary claim that he can't acquire a company with such a huge bots problem is tough to make, given his stated preference to buy Twitter *so that he can clean up the bots* https://twitter.com/...
@dkthomp Derek Thompson on x
4. Musk's final claim is that Twitter stopped operating in the “ordinary course” of business. I talked to Brian Quinn, a law professor at Boston College, about this. He said “ordinary course” claims have held up in the Delaware Court of Chancery. This could be Musk's best shot! h…
@davidsacks David Sacks on x
Twitter is toast. https://twitter.com/...
@imbernomics Scott Imberman on x
No machine learning? I can't believe they did not even use a logit. Real own goal there by Twitter. https://twitter.com/...
@cliffordvickrey Clifford Vickrey on x
It's funny that Elon pretends to be a math genius without knowing how probability works at its most basic level. Pretty sure they teach the central limit theorem in Stats 101 https://twitter.com/...
@davidsacks David Sacks on x
Plus no sense of humor. 💩🤣 https://twitter.com/...

Chronicles