I understand many people dislike Musk, but this headline is just insane.
Musk's lawyers moved to dismiss the suit, as any lawyers would. He did not just ask the judge to "toss" the lawsuit.
This is a very poor display of journalistic integrity.
What is the distinction between “dismissing” a lawsuit and “tossing” it?
To “toss” something means to throw it out. That seems equivalent to dismissing it to me. Musk’s lawyers are acting on his instructions and are asking the judge to do this in his behalf.
The action, being a request that the case not continue, is equivalent, but the use of "toss" here implies a unreasonableness or inappropriateness that doesn't actually exist.
IANAL, but my understanding is that when a court case is brought against you, step one is pretty much always asking for it to be dismissed. It's not unreasonable or inappropriate, it's the status quo for court cases and entirely to be expected. In no way does it reflect on Musk except to say that he hired lawyers that are at least minimally competent.
This is quite true. I think the anger over this kind of thing comes from somewhere else, and they're right that the article title is unprofessional and the anger misdirected.
I think the actual issue is that people understand that someone like Musk, one of the worlds richest people, can essentially keep appealing rulings until he gets a ruling he likes simply because he can afford to.
The justice system is broken when it allows endless chances for those with oodles of money like Musk, but the rest of us can't afford that and usually have to accept what we're given.
It's not helpful for people's feelings about that aspect of this issue to cloud how they discuss it. Musk's legal team isn't doing anything wrong within the legal framework, but people tire of it because it seems that with enough money, you can essentially get away with anything.
The US justice system has essentially always been pay-to-play/pay-to-win. It's part of why the government doesn't like getting embroiled in legal battles with billionaires because they know they can delay and appeal for decades because they can afford a team lawyers for that long. The governments allotted budget for a legal case is often much smaller than a billionaires.
It's how the system was built from the ground up and if we don't like it we should probably vote in some folks who will prioritize changing how it works instead of always being angry at rich people for doing what they're incentivized to do based on how the system works.
Literally just google "Ask judge to toss suit" and you will see tons of results on either side of the political divide. I'm seeing results for Amber Heard, Ron DeSantis, Hillary Clinton, Alec Baldwin...
Did you read the motion? Do you know whether it is appropriate or not? It's pretty common parlance to refer to this as "requesting that a case be tossed."
It's amusing (w/r/t to your naivety) that you assume the request is valid, but the reporting is flippant.
>I'm not not assuming the request is valid, that's for the judge to decide, I'm just saying the submission of such a request is not exceptional.
It isn't exceptional no one said it was. What's also not exceptional is referring to a request to dismiss anything as "tossing".
>Musk's lawyers, not musk himself, submitted a motion to dismiss that argues the case as filed doesn't have a sound legal basis.
Not every case has a MTD filed. In fact, if you aren't going to win, a MTD is a total waste of money.
Regardless, google "Ask judge to toss suit" and you will see hundreds of results across the political spectrum that are no different than the article here.
> the use of "toss" here implies a unreasonableness or inappropriateness that doesn't actually exist.
No it doesn't. The lawyer's own language, from the subhead of the article:
> Musk's lawyers called Dogecoin "a legitimate cryptocurrency" and the lawsuit, Johnson v. Musk et al., a "fanciful work of fiction."
Even if the lawyers hadn't used that language, "toss" is a commonly used colloquial term (which fits for a casual news site like gizmodo) for exactly what they're requesting and doesn't imply an "unreasonableness" or "inappropriateness".
For sure. And in this case he has particular reason to ask for the case to be dismissed/tossed with extreme prejudice. The damages sought in particular seem extremely "ambitious" (ie it feels to me like a total shakedown).
Maybe I'm reading into it too much. In my mind I read "tossed" as an implication that the suit is frivolous and inconsequential, and subsequently implying that Elon is in the mindset of "this is a waste of time, chuck it out". It frames Elon as childish and naive, which is undoubtedly their intent with this "The Dogefather" thing.
I think the parent comment is saying that this article is making a sensational anti-Musk story out of what is really a normal legal process. It's a non-story but the headline makes it sound like Musk is somehow employing illegal or unscrupulous tactics (hence "dogefather").
> Musk’s lawyers moved to dismiss the suit, as any lawyers would. He did not just ask the judge to “toss” the lawsuit.
Lawyers are agents of their clients, and “toss” is a vernacular term for the more formal “dismiss”. Musk literally did ask the judge to toss the case (and, yes, a defense motion of this type is completely normal.
15 comments
[ 1.9 ms ] story [ 48.5 ms ] threadThis is a very poor display of journalistic integrity.
To “toss” something means to throw it out. That seems equivalent to dismissing it to me. Musk’s lawyers are acting on his instructions and are asking the judge to do this in his behalf.
IANAL, but my understanding is that when a court case is brought against you, step one is pretty much always asking for it to be dismissed. It's not unreasonable or inappropriate, it's the status quo for court cases and entirely to be expected. In no way does it reflect on Musk except to say that he hired lawyers that are at least minimally competent.
I think the actual issue is that people understand that someone like Musk, one of the worlds richest people, can essentially keep appealing rulings until he gets a ruling he likes simply because he can afford to.
The justice system is broken when it allows endless chances for those with oodles of money like Musk, but the rest of us can't afford that and usually have to accept what we're given.
It's not helpful for people's feelings about that aspect of this issue to cloud how they discuss it. Musk's legal team isn't doing anything wrong within the legal framework, but people tire of it because it seems that with enough money, you can essentially get away with anything.
The US justice system has essentially always been pay-to-play/pay-to-win. It's part of why the government doesn't like getting embroiled in legal battles with billionaires because they know they can delay and appeal for decades because they can afford a team lawyers for that long. The governments allotted budget for a legal case is often much smaller than a billionaires.
It's how the system was built from the ground up and if we don't like it we should probably vote in some folks who will prioritize changing how it works instead of always being angry at rich people for doing what they're incentivized to do based on how the system works.
It's amusing (w/r/t to your naivety) that you assume the request is valid, but the reporting is flippant.
Musk's lawyers, not musk himself, submitted a motion to dismiss that argues the case as filed doesn't have a sound legal basis.
That's not newsworthy, that's a court case proceeding as normal.
It isn't exceptional no one said it was. What's also not exceptional is referring to a request to dismiss anything as "tossing".
>Musk's lawyers, not musk himself, submitted a motion to dismiss that argues the case as filed doesn't have a sound legal basis.
Not every case has a MTD filed. In fact, if you aren't going to win, a MTD is a total waste of money.
Regardless, google "Ask judge to toss suit" and you will see hundreds of results across the political spectrum that are no different than the article here.
No it doesn't. The lawyer's own language, from the subhead of the article:
> Musk's lawyers called Dogecoin "a legitimate cryptocurrency" and the lawsuit, Johnson v. Musk et al., a "fanciful work of fiction."
Even if the lawyers hadn't used that language, "toss" is a commonly used colloquial term (which fits for a casual news site like gizmodo) for exactly what they're requesting and doesn't imply an "unreasonableness" or "inappropriateness".
No, its just the usual informal term for dismissing a case.
They are absolutely calling the lawsuit frivolous. This in no way frames Elon as childish or naive.
Lawyers are agents of their clients, and “toss” is a vernacular term for the more formal “dismiss”. Musk literally did ask the judge to toss the case (and, yes, a defense motion of this type is completely normal.