Lamontagne V. Tesla, Inc. Et Al

This is a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of plaintiff Thomas Lamontagne, who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Tesla common stock at prices artificially inflated by Defendants’ wrongful conduct. Plaintiff and the other members of the Class allege that they were misled by false and/or misleading statements and omissions made by Tesla and its senior officers and/or directors. They claim that they would not have purchased or otherwise acquired Tesla common stock, or would not have purchased or otherwise acquired them at the inflated prices that were paid, had they known the truth. The complaint alleges that the market price of Tesla common stock declined sharply upon public disclosure of the facts alleged. It is further alleged that the Individual Defendants, who were officers and/or directors of the company, had a duty to disseminate accurate and truthful information with respect to Tesla’s Autopilot and FSD technologies, and the safety of the company's vehicles. The complaint seeks damages for those who purchased or otherwise acquired Tesla common stock during the class period. The Individual Defendants are liable for the false statements and omissions alleged herein, and were provided with copies of Tesla’s SEC filings and press releases alleged herein to be misleading prior to or shortly after their issuance and had the ability and opportunity to prevent their issuance or to cause them to be corrected. The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.

Full Screen

United States of America v. Robert Hunter Biden

Summary: Hunter Biden is currently embroiled in a lawsuit, accused of purchasing a Colt Cobra revolver in October 2018 while allegedly using illegal substances. Despite denying drug use on the necessary paperwork, if found guilty, he could face a maximum of 25 years in prison along with substantial fines. Biden's defense team contends that the charges are politically driven, asserting that Biden's temporary possession of an unloaded firearm did not constitute a public safety risk. They intend to contest the charges, leveraging an agreement with the prosecution, recent federal court decisions, and potential Second Amendment defenses. This case could potentially ignite wider discussions about Second Amendment rights, especially as the Supreme Court is poised to deliberate on a related issue concerning gun ownership for individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders. Opinions are divided among political and legislative figures, with some speculating that advocates of the Second Amendment might oppose the law that prohibits gun ownership for drug users.