Elon Musk is involved in lots of lawsuits. Here’s every active case and investigation Tesla, SpaceX, and the CEO himself face

Lawsuits brought by Musk

Musk v. Media Matters

The issue: Musk’s company X Corp. filed a lawsuit in Texas against the liberal advocacy group Media Matters in November, alleging the group launched a “blatant smear campaign” against X.

What’s going on: Last year, Media Matters published a report that indicated X was placing advertising content next to pro-Nazi posts on the social media site. The nonprofit’s report appeared to launch another advertising exodus from Musk’s social media site.

Musk claims in his lawsuit that the group manipulated its findings and cherry-picked information. In response, Media Matters president Angelo Carusone called it “a frivolous lawsuit meant to bully X’s critics into silence.”

The issue has broadened into investigations from right-wing state attorneys general in Texas and Missouri, who are examining whether Media Matters broke civil laws with its reporting on Musk’s social media company.

Media Matters laid off several employees in May, blaming the “legal assault” that it says restricted its resources.

What’s next: Media Matters lost an attempt to force the judge in the case, US District Judge Reed O’Connor, to recuse himself, after he stepped aside from another lawsuit by X following reports that he owned Tesla stock. The trial is ongoing.

Gina Carano v. Disney

The issues: Actress Gina Carano is suing Disney after it fired her from “The Mandalorian” after she made posts on X comparing the treatment of conservatives in America to Jews in Nazi Germany. One post also engaged in Holocaust denial, claiming “thousands” of Jews were “rounded up,” rather than millions. X is funding the lawsuit, and Musk has championed it on the platform.

What’s going on: Musk has promised to back lawsuits supporting people who were fired because of their X posts, and Carano’s is a test case for that project, which Musk says is meant to protect free speech.

The lawsuit, crafted by boutique conservative law firm Schaerr Jaffe, focuses on California labor laws that protect political activism outside the workplace.

In July, the judge overseeing the case rejected Disney’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Disney argued the company has a First Amendment right not to associate with Carano’s views, which also include criticism of vaccine mandates and questioning the results of the 2020 election.

What’s next: The lawsuit now seems likely to move onto a trial after the judge declined to dismiss the suit.

Musk v. NLRB

The issues: Musk’s Tesla is fighting a decision by the National Labor Relations Board that the electric-car company CEO violated labor laws back in 2018 when he tweeted that Tesla employees could lose their stock options if they unionized.

What’s going on: A three-judge panel of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld the NLRB’s finding that Musk’s tweet unlawfully threatened Tesla employees’ benefits. Musk’s May 21, 2018 tweet at the center of the matter read: “Nothing stopping Tesla team at our car plant from voting union. Could do so tmrw if they wanted. But why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? Our safety record is 2X better than when plant was UAW & everybody already gets healthcare.”

Attorneys for Tesla — which argued that Musk’s tweet could not be interpreted as a threat — asked the federal appeals court to reconsider the ruling. That request was granted.

What’s next: The full 5th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case earlier this year, and the 17-judge panel has yet to issue a ruling.

Musk vs Altman

The issues: After dropping his first lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman in June, Musk filed a new lawsuit against the company and its cofounders Altman and Greg Brockman in August.

What’s going on: In the new lawsuit, Musk argued he had been “deceived” into co-founding the company and “assiduously manipulated” by Altman and Brockman, who he says played on his fears that AI posed an existential risk to humanity.

The lawsuit again focuses on claims that OpenAI transitioned from a benign non-profit to a for-profit entity, which Musk’s lawyers describe as “a vehicle for Altman and his partners’ self-enrichment.”

Musk founded OpenAI along with Altman and Brockman in 2015, before departing in 2018. The billionaire has set up his own AI startup, xAI, to compete with the ChatGPT creator.

What’s next: The lawsuit is working its way through California’s Northern District Court. OpenAI referred BI to Musk’s emails, which the company publicly released in response to the first lawsuit.

Musk v. California Coastal Commission

The issues: On Tuesday, October 15, Musk’s SpaceX sued the California Coastal Commission after the state agency cited his politics in a meeting over whether to reject a US Space Force request for more frequent SpaceX launches from California’s central coast.

What’s going on: Musk filed the lawsuit in the US District Court for the Central District of California, accusing the commission of “unconstitutional overreach” and violating the First and 14th Amendments.

The California Coastal Commission regulates the use of land and water along the state’s coast. Earlier this month, the agency, in a 6-4 vote, rejected a federal government request to allow SpaceX to conduct 50 launches a year from the Vandenberg Space Force Base, up from 36. In the decision, the agency said SpaceX, as a private company, needed to obtain a permit, regardless of its relationship with the government.

Commissioner Gretchen Newsom voiced concerns about Musk’s frequent political posting, as well as working conditions at SpaceX in a meeting discussing the request.

Musk responded to the rejection by accusing the commission of unfairly asserting its regulatory powers in opposition to his increasingly right-leaning politics.

What’s next: Legal experts told Business Insider that Musk’s suit could prove successful if he can effectively prove that his political speech played an outsize role in the commission’s decision. The commission declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Personal lawsuits against Musk

Tornetta v. Musk

The issues: Tesla shareholder Richard Tornetta sued Musk and Tesla in a class action lawsuit regarding Musk’s compensation package, which was worth $55.8 billion at the time.

What’s going on: In 2018, Tesla set up a pay plan for Musk that involved a 10-year grant of 12 tranches of stock options that would vest when Tesla hit certain targets tied to the automaker’s market value and revenue. Musk was able to hit all 12 targets in 2023. With each milestone, Musk received stock equal to 1% of outstanding shares at the time of the grant.

Tornetta’s lawsuit alleges that the pay package was “beyond the bounds of reasonable judgment” and says Musk had influenced the board’s approval of the plan, including through his close personal relationships with board members such as his brother Kimbal Musk.

Tesla has argued that compensation was needed to maintain Musk’s attention, and shareholders have benefited from the impact Musk’s leadership has had on Tesla’s stock, which has climbed dramatically since 2018.

The Delaware Court of Chancery struck down Musk’s pay package in January. In June, Tesla shareholders voted to approve the package.

What’s next: Musk is expected to use the recent shareholder vote to ask the Delaware Chancery Court to reconsider its decision, hoping their approval will help convince the judge that the pay package is sensible. He’s also likely to continue appealing the case if he loses.

Boucher v. Musk

The issues: Claire Boucher, AKA Grimes, and Musk have each filed dueling lawsuits in a custody dispute in California and Texas, respectively.

What’s going on: The Musk-Grimes custody battle began in September when the CEO sued his ex-partner to “establish the parent-child relationship” with their three kids: X Æ A-XII, Exa Dark Sideræl, and Techno Mechanicus. In his petition, the billionaire said he filed the lawsuit after he realized Grimes “was not returning to Texas with their younger children.” Three-year-old X has remained with Musk.

A few weeks later, Grimes sued Musk in San Francisco court, seeking primary physical custody and joint legal custody of the pair’s three children.

What’s next: The case was sealed in January and remained ongoing as of April, when Business Insider was last able to view the docket. Neither side has publicly indicated that the case has been resolved.

Benjamin Brody v. Musk

The issues: California man Benjamin Brody filed a defamation lawsuit against Musk in Texas last year, alleging that the billionaire amplified a conspiracy theory that falsely affiliated the college graduate with a neo-Nazi extremist group.

What’s going on: Brody’s lawsuit accuses Musk of boosting the claims on his X social media site and says Brody endured “severe personal harassment and permanent damage to his reputation.” Musk’s “personal endorsement of the false accusation against” Brody reverberated across the internet, transforming the accusation from anonymous rumor to gospel truth for many individuals, and causing others to use Musk’s endorsement to justify their desire to harass Ben Brody and his family,” the lawsuit says. In a deposition, Musk said he didn’t know who Brody was.

What’s next: Brody’s lawsuit is seeking $1 million in damages and a trial by jury. Musk’s attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Neuralink monkey scratch lawsuit

The issues: Lindsay Short, a former employee in Musk’s brain-chip-implantation company Neuralink, alleged in a lawsuit that the company fired her after she said she was pregnant. The suit also alleges she was repeatedly scratched by monkeys because the company didn’t provide proper protective gear.

What’s going on: The lawsuit, filed on June 14 in a California court, paints a portrait of a workplace with insufficient protections and dangerous conditions. On one occasion, the lawsuit alleges, a monkey carrying the Herpes B virus scratched Short and broke her skin, exposing her to the virus.

What’s next: Neuralink hasn’t yet responded to the lawsuit in court.

Twitter severance lawsuits

The issues: Hundreds of former Twitter employees are suing X for unpaid severance.

What’s going on: When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he quickly fired thousands of employees — he claimed over 80% — and didn’t pay any severance to many of them. In court filings, X claims the merger agreement that allowed Musk to control Twitter didn’t require any payments and that the former employees have no standing to sue because they weren’t part of the merger.

Even former Twitter executives have sued Musk over severance. Twitter’s former chief accounting officer, Robert Kaiden, alleged that Musk falsely accused him of misconduct so he could fire him without paying out severance. Kaiden said he’s owed $3.75 million in unpaid severance.

There are multiple different lawsuits in different districts. Musk’s lawyers successfully convinced a judge to toss the biggest one, demanding $500 million in damages and class action certification, in July.

Several lawsuits also allege Musk discriminated against them because of their race, gender, or disability in choosing to fire them.

What’s next: With the proposed class-action case in California dismissed, each lawsuit will now be decided on a piecemeal basis in the courts. Meanwhile, Twitter has considered settling some of the claims.

Agrawal v. Musk

The issues: Four former Twitter executives (ex-Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal, ex-Twitter CFO Ned Segal, ex-head of legal, policy, and trust at Twitter Vijaya Gadde, and ex-senior legal counsel at Twitter Sean Edgett) sued Musk and X in March, alleging the company failed to pay out millions of dollars in severance.

What’s going on: After Musk took over Twitter in 2023, he terminated the four executives within minutes.

The executives were set to receive golden parachutes, but claim Musk and X have not paid them out. The group says X collectively owes them $128 million in severance.

Musk has said he fired the executives for cause and does not owe them anything. In August, Agrawal, Segal, and Gadde separately sued Twitter for over $1 million, alleging the social media company hadn’t paid the legal fees they accrued during their time at Twitter.

What’s next: The lawsuits are all in various stages, with judges having yet to rule on motions to dismiss them.

X vs Wiwynn

The issues: Taiwanese tech firm Wiwynn filed a lawsuit against X in August, seeking at least $61 million in damages over claims the social media firm refused to pay for server parts worth about $120 million after Musk took control in 2022.

What’s going on: Nearly two years after Musk took over the company once known as Twitter, he’s still dealing with the legal fallout. Wiwynn claims X violated a long-standing purchase agreement when it “abruptly stopped” making any payments to Wiwynn in November 2022, and failed to respond to requests for payment for completed products.

After Musk bought Twitter, he began aggressively cutting costs, laying off 80% of the workforce. The company also faced complaints from numerous vendors over unpaid bills, with Musk reportedly telling employees “let them sue.”

What’s next: X has not yet responded to the lawsuit, which was filed in the Northern District Court of California.

Cards Against Humanity lawsuit

The issue: Cards Against Humanity, the company behind the oft-inappropriate party game of the same name, is suing Musk’s SpaceX over a Texas land dispute, saying the space company trespassed on its property — a “pristine parcel of land” that the game maker bought to protect itself from “Donald Trump’s very stupid wall.”

What’s going on: Cards Against Humanity filed a civil lawsuit against SpaceX in September in Cameron County, Texas, for $15 million. The company said in an Instagram post that it would split any winnings among the 150,000 original donors who helped fund the land’s original purchase.

In the lawsuit, Cards Against Humanity accused SpaceX of ignoring the property line and building “large modern-looking buildings” on adjacent lots, depositing gravel on the game maker’s property and leaving constructional vehicles there.

Cards Against Humanity originally bought the land in a promotional effort to highlight billionaires who “ignore the rights and problems of regular people” and partially block Trump’s border wall effort, according to the lawsuit.

What’s next: SpaceX has yet to publicly respond to the lawsuit.