By Jody Godoy and Hyunjoo Jin

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -A U.S. jury on Friday discovered Tesla (NASDAQ:) Inc CEO Elon Musk and his firm weren’t chargeable for deceptive traders when Musk tweeted in 2018 that he had lined up funding to take the electrical automobile firm personal.

Plaintiffs had claimed billions in damages and the choice additionally had been seen as vital for Musk himself, who has aggressively defended his means to tweet broadly.

The jury got here again with a verdict roughly two hours after starting deliberations.

“The jury bought it proper,” Musk’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, instructed reporters after the decision. He declined to say extra.

Musk was not current in court docket when the decision was learn.

“We’re disillusioned with the decision and are contemplating subsequent steps,” Nicholas Porritt, a lawyer for the traders, stated in a press release.

Shares of Tesla rose 1.7% in after-hours buying and selling following the decision.

“It is a clear optimistic with background noise clearing on Tesla from 2018 tweet saga. A darkish chapter is now closed for Musk and Tesla,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives stated. Some Tesla traders had feared {that a} Musk loss would drive him to promote extra Tesla inventory, he added.

The world’s second-richest individual has beforehand created authorized and regulatory complications by way of his typically impulsive use of Twitter, the social media firm he purchased for $44 billion in October.

Musk’s consideration has been divided in latest months between Tesla, his rocket firm SpaceX and now Twitter. Tesla traders have expressed issues that working the social media firm has taken up an excessive amount of of his focus.

Tesla shareholders claimed Musk misled them when he tweeted on Aug. 7, 2018, that he was contemplating taking the corporate personal at $420 per share, a premium of about 23% to the prior day’s shut, and had “funding secured.”

They are saying Musk lied when he tweeted later that day that “investor help is confirmed.”

The inventory value soared after the tweets after which fell once more after Aug. 17, 2018, because it turned clear the buyout wouldn’t occur.

Porritt throughout closing arguments stated the billionaire CEO isn’t above the regulation, and ought to be held be chargeable for the tweets.

“This case in the end is about whether or not guidelines that apply to everybody else must also apply to Elon Musk,” he stated.

Spiro countered that Musk’s “funding secured” tweet was “technically inaccurate” however that traders solely cared that Musk was contemplating a buyout.

“The entire case is constructed on dangerous phrase alternative,” he stated. “Who cares about dangerous phrase alternative?”

“Simply because it is a dangerous tweet does not make it fraud,” Spiro stated throughout closing arguments.

An economist employed by the shareholders had calculated investor losses as excessive as $12 billion.

In the course of the three-week trial, Musk spent almost 9 hours on the witness stand, telling jurors he believed the tweets have been truthful. He stated he had lined up the required financing, together with a verbal dedication from Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, the Public Funding Fund. The fund later backpedaled on its dedication, Musk stated.

Musk later testified that he believed he may have offered sufficient shares of his rocket firm SpaceX to fund a buyout, and “felt funding was secured” with SpaceX inventory alone.

Musk testified that he made the tweets as a way to put small shareholders on the identical footing as massive traders who knew in regards to the deal. However he acknowledged he lacked formal commitments from the Saudi fund and different potential backers.

He stated his tweets normally didn’t all the time have an effect on Tesla inventory the way in which he expects.

“Simply because I tweet one thing doesn’t imply individuals imagine it or will act accordingly,” Musk instructed the jury.