Twitter Wants Laid-Off Workers’ Suit Moved to Delaware or Tossed

Twitter Inc. workers who lost their jobs during new CEO Elon Musk‘s mass layoffs should have to litigate their claims in Delaware or not at all, the company told a federal judge in California.

The workers seek severance payments as laid out in the merger agreement that facilitated Musk’s $44 billion takeover. That agreement also includes an exclusive venue and forum-selection provision directing all related suits to Delaware, and the workers can’t enforce some provisions and “ignore” others, Twitter said in a motion filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

The social media company wants the case transferred to the District of Delaware or, alternatively, dismissed for improper venue. The workers also fell short of alleging violations of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and shouldn’t be allowed to move forward with that portion of the suit, Twitter said.

Twitter in November asked the court to send the five original plaintiffs’ claims to arbitration. Three newer plaintiffs aren’t subject to arbitration agreements with Twitter. The court hasn’t ruled on that request, but if the case remains in federal court, “then the rationale for transfer or dismissal pursuant to the forum-selection provision applies equally to all named Plaintiffs,” the company’s Dec. 23 motion said.

The workers can’t dispute that their claims stem from the merger agreement and “alleged promises that were made based upon” it, Twitter said. “The exclusive venue and forum-selection provision clearly applies to these claims because this provision covers any action ‘relating to’ the Merger Agreement,” according to the motion.

The workers bear the burden of showing that the express forum-selection provision is unenforceable, the company said. But the Northern District of California has “recognized only limited circumstances” under which such a provision can’t be enforced, and “none of those factors exist here,” according to Twitter.

Twitter also argued that the claims under the federal WARN Act and California’s state version of the same law should be thrown out because the workers “admit that they received adequate notice” of the mass layoffs. The complaint also failed to define the proposed class, according to the company.

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP represents Twitter. Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC represents the workers.

The case is Cornet v. Twitter Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 3:22-cv-06857, motion filed 12/23/22.