Elon Musk suffered one of many greatest authorized losses in US historical past this week when the Tesla CEO was stripped of his $56 billion pay package in a case introduced by an unlikely opponent, a former heavy metal drummer.

Richard Tornetta sued Musk in 2018, when the Pennsylvania resident held simply 9 shares of Tesla. The case ultimately made its strategy to trial in late 2022 and on Tuesday a choose sided with Tornetta, voiding the large pay deal for being unfair to him and all his fellow Tesla shareholders.

Tornetta couldn’t be reached for a remark and his legal professional declined to remark.

Until Tornetta’s case, Musk prevailed in a string of trials accusing him of defamation, of breaching his obligation to shareholders and of violating securities legal guidelines.

Based on his on-line presence, Tornetta appears to have extra of an curiosity in creating audio gear for car-customizing fans than going after company extra and malfeasance.

He has posted light-hearted movies about devices he has created or mishaps, together with describing how he torched his eyebrows.

Tornetta additionally turned up in movies drumming on the legendary former New York membership CBGB along with his now-defunct metal band “Dawn of Correction”, which described its sound as “a swift kick to the face with a steel-toed work boot.”

On social media, followers of Tesla and Musk appeared to search out the case a travesty of justice and speculated about Tornetta’s intentions and political affiliations, asking how an investor with such miniscule holdings might wield such energy.

Delaware company case regulation is stuffed with circumstances bearing the names of particular person buyers with tiny shareholdings who wound up shaping America’s company regulation.

Many regulation corporations that characterize shareholders preserve a secure of buyers they’ll work with to deliver circumstances, says Eric Talley, who teaches company regulation at Columbia Law School. They may be pension funds with a broad vary of inventory holdings however they’re additionally typically people like Tornetta.

The plaintiff indicators paperwork to file the lawsuit after which typically will get out of the way in which, says Talley. The buyers do not pay the regulation agency, which takes the case on contingency, because the legal professionals did within the Musk case.

Tornetta advantages from successful the case the identical manner different Tesla shareholders profit: saving the corporate billions of {dollars} {that a} subservient board of administrators paid to Musk.

Business teams have lengthy criticised circumstances introduced by people as a sign of doubtless abusive litigation. Delaware 10 years in the past was plagued with lawsuits led by retail buyers proudly owning a number of shares difficult merger offers. The circumstances had been typically rapidly resolved with meaningless settlements that at all times included funds to the attorneys bringing the circumstances. Delaware judges and lawmakers ultimately reined within the follow.

Experts stated individuals like Tornetta are important for policing boardrooms. Lawmakers and judges have lengthy wished giant funding corporations to guide such company litigation since they’re higher outfitted to regulate their legal professionals’ ways. But consultants stated fund managers don’t need to jeopardise relationships on Wall Street.

So it was as much as Tornetta to tackle Musk.

“His name is now etched in the annals of corporate law,” Talley stated. “My students will be reading Tornetta v Musk for the next 10 years.”