Stock Markets March 26, 2026

Musk Asks Judge to Revisit Jury Verdict, Cites Possible Mockery on Verdict Form

Lawyer argues jurors used a conspicuous '420' marking and that trial errors warrant further judicial scrutiny of potential $2.5 billion damages

By Ajmal Hussain TSLA
Musk Asks Judge to Revisit Jury Verdict, Cites Possible Mockery on Verdict Form
TSLA

Elon Musk’s attorney has asked a federal judge to review a March 20 jury verdict that found Musk liable for defrauding Twitter investors, arguing jurors improperly used the verdict to deliver a message. The request, filed March 26 in San Francisco federal court, points to a bright blue "$4.20" entry on the verdict form and alleges other trial errors that, together, call the verdict into question. The case involves claims that Musk’s post-announcement comments about fake and spam accounts pressured Twitter to renegotiate or allowed him to exit, harming investors who sold shares at depressed prices.

Key Points

  • Musk’s lawyer Alex Spiro filed a letter on Thursday in San Francisco federal court asking Judge Charles Breyer to review the March 20 jury verdict that found Musk liable for defrauding Twitter investors.
  • Spiro pointed to a bright blue "$4.20" entry on the verdict form, arguing the marking was an intentional numerical joke and evidence the jury used the verdict to send a message rather than fulfill its duty.
  • Jurors held Musk liable for two statements questioning the prevalence of fake and spam accounts on Twitter; investors say those comments depressed the stock and caused losses when they sold their shares. Potential damages from the verdict could reach $2.5 billion.

A lawyer for Elon Musk has urged U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer to reexamine a recent jury decision that held Musk liable for defrauding investors in connection with his purchase of Twitter, now called X. In a letter filed on Thursday in San Francisco federal court, Musk’s attorney Alex Spiro said the verdict should be reviewed because jurors used their verdict to "send a message," rather than render a sober determination.

Spiro highlighted a striking visual detail on the verdict form: the dollar amount "$4.20" was written in bright blue ink while the other entries were in black. He characterized the entry as a deliberate "numerical joke," noting the cultural association of 420 with marijuana and Musk’s own repeated public use of the number.

The letter contends that the jury’s choice to include that blue-marked number amounted to mocking the defendant and undercuts the impartiality of the verdict. Spiro wrote that the "inescapable conclusion from the face of the verdict form is that the jury felt it appropriate to use its verdict to send a message to Mr. Musk, instead of properly discharging its solemn duty to render a just verdict."

Jurors found Musk liable for two statements he made shortly after announcing his intention to buy Twitter, in which he questioned whether the platform was overrun by fake and spam accounts. Investors argue those statements were aimed at forcing Twitter to renegotiate the deal or enabling Musk to abandon the transaction, and that the comments depressed Twitter’s stock price, causing losses for shareholders who sold at lower prices.

The March 20 verdict, which Spiro says contains other alleged trial errors, could expose Musk to damages that may reach $2.5 billion. The buyout valued Twitter at $54.20 per share as part of Musk’s roughly $44 billion acquisition, which he completed in October 2022.

Spiro emphasized that the appearance of the blue "$4.20" figure was "no doubt intentional," and urged Judge Breyer to conduct "further inquiry" into the verdict in light of the asserted irregularities and other concerns raised in the letter.

Lawyers representing the Twitter investors did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The filing also notes that Musk has previously used the number 420 in connection with his business activities. The letter cites earlier instances such as a 2020 reduction in the price of Tesla’s Model S by 4% to $69,420, and a 2018 tweet in which he stated he had "funding secured" to take Tesla private at $420 per share; that tweet prompted a civil fraud lawsuit by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that Musk later settled.


Contextual note - The allegations at the heart of the investors’ claims focus on whether Musk’s post-announcement statements were intended to influence the terms of the deal or to justify withdrawal, and whether those statements caused measurable harm to shareholders who sold their shares at lower prices following the comments.

Risks

  • Alleged jury misconduct or signaling - If the blue "$4.20" marking reflects juror bias, it could undermine the legitimacy of the verdict and prompt further legal action - impacts legal and tech sectors.
  • Material damages exposure - The verdict leaves open the possibility of damages up to $2.5 billion, a financial consequence with implications for Musk’s finances and related market perceptions - impacts markets and technology companies tied to Musk.
  • Ongoing litigation uncertainty - Additional inquiries or appeals could prolong legal uncertainty around the acquisition and investor recoveries, affecting investor sentiment and corporate governance conversations in social media and tech sectors.

More from Stock Markets

Pernod Ricard and Brown-Forman Hold Merger Talks, Sources Say Mar 26, 2026 Occidental Stock Climbs as Leadership Change Nears Mar 26, 2026 Animal welfare nonprofit sues Panera, alleging consumers were misled about meat sourcing Mar 26, 2026 Occidental’s Vicki Hollub Readies Retirement as Leadership Handover Nears Mar 26, 2026 Apple to let Siri route queries to competing AI services in iOS 27 Mar 26, 2026