Twitter sued for $2M by consultant seeking payment for help in Musk deal
Christopher Hutton
Video Embed
A consulting firm is suing Twitter for failing to pay $2 million for its help in dealing with Elon Musk’s acquisition of the company.
Charles River Associates, a Boston-based consulting firm, filed a suit against Twitter on Thursday, alleging that the Big Tech company had failed to pay it for work. The suit is the latest legal pressure the company has received since Musk’s takeover, adding to several suits by former employees over their firings.
SUPREME COURT COULD TAKE CHALLENGES TO MAJOR BIG TECH LAWS IN TEXAS AND FLORIDA
The social media company’s former leaders had hired the consulting firm to provide expert witness against Musk in its lawsuit forcing him to pay for Twitter. A court appearance was never necessary, though, after Musk reversed course and followed through on his agreement to acquire Twitter.
Twitter has not responded to the suit due to a lack of public relations department.
Twitter is dealing with several lawsuits in the wake of Musk’s takeover. Several employees filed a class-action suit against Twitter in early November after the initial round of firings, and at least 200 have filed legal complaints in the form of arbitration demands, claiming the company failed to compensate them adequately.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The company is also dealing with a lawsuit attempting to hold Twitter accountable for the leaking of 200 million users’ personal account data. “Twitter is obligated, and has promised to, protect certain private information entrusted to it by its users in order to access the platform,” the suit argues, claiming that the hack came from a defect in Twitter’s security. That defect has been the focus of Twitter whistleblower Peiter “Mudge” Zatko’s testimony in September.
Twitter has been struggling under Musk’s management. The company’s revenue is down 40% year-over-year, according to engineers in Twitter’s advertising division. It also took action to strip third-party clients’ access to the website’s internal code, according to recent Slack messages.