Getty Images
One of Elon Musk's friends subpoenaed in the Twitter acquisition lawsuit has lost an appeal to quash the request because of his behavior on Twitter and his podcast, a judge has ruled.
David Sacks, the CEO of Craft Ventures and member of the "PayPal mafia", lost his appeal after being subpoenaed by Twitter for correspondence with Musk, according to court documents from Chancellor Kathleen McCormick.
Sacks said on his "All-In" podcast on August 5 that he had been subpoenaed by the social media platform over his comments on the Twitter acquisition, which he said was too broad.
"I have no involvement in this thing, but they sent me the broadest ever subpoena. It's like, 30 pages of requests. And now I gotta hire a lawyer to go quash this thing," the former PayPal executive said.
Musk backed out of his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter, saying he was misled on the number of fake accounts on the platform, sparking suits and countersuits from the two parties. Musk appeared on Sacks's podcast in the middle of his takeover bid in May.
One of Sacks' tweets that caused his subpoena was thought to be a checklist of targets for Musk to address if and when he took control of Twitter.
Sacks, a prominent venture capitalist, had taken out a non-disclosure agreement to evaluate a potential investment in connection with Musk's acquisition of Twitter, the filing said.
Sacks' lawyers said the Delaware requests from Twitter were inappropriate because they were "unduly burdensome because they were duplicative of the California subpoenas and the return dates were too soon." Sacks also complained about having to hire lawyers.
Sacks initially responded to the subpoena by tweeting a picture of a middle finger from a Mad magazine cover, and posting a follow-up video from "The Wolf of Wall Street" of a character urinating on a subpoena.
—David Sacks (@DavidSacks) August 2, 2022
This behavior prompted a complaint by Twitter, and was cited by McCormick as the reason the subpoena could not be quashed. Sack's complaint about needing lawyers was also unnecessary, she said, and only appears to have occurred because Sack told his podcast listeners he would do so.
"In other circumstances, I might view entirely duplicative subpoenas served for such tactical purposes as problematic. Where, as here, the subpoena recipient tweets the subpoenaing attorneys the middle finger and a video of someone urinating on subpoenas, I am less bothered by it.
"In an apparent effort to keep Sacks's promise to his podcast listeners, the movants created the very burden of which they now complain."
McCormick's ruling may have implications for serial-tweeter Musk, who has repeatedly used the platform to antagonize Twitter. Columbia Law professor Eric Talley told Insider she was likely to take antagonistic tweets into consideration in her ruling.
Read the filing in full here:
