Billionaires' Party! Elon Musk ($266 billion) and his friend, tycoon Larry Ellison ($106 billion) dine at Nobu

• Tesla founder Musk, the world's richest man, dined with Ellison, the sixth richest man.
• The longtime friends supposedly discussed Elon's Twitter bid, to which Ellison donated $1 billion.
• Oracle CEO, worth over $100 billion, steps down, leaving five-person security team in charge
• Nobu, an Asian restaurant in Malibu, is known for having celebrities such as Kim Kardashian as regular customers.
• The extravagant dishes include a $92 New York steak, $70 lobster and $2,800 sake.

As Elon Musk's legal battle with Twitter continues, he spent four hours with his friend and former Tesla shareholder, billionaire Larry Ellison, at a swanky Asian restaurant in Malibu.

Musk, 51, enjoyed a lengthy and lavish meal with tech mogul Larry Ellison, 77, late into the night on Wednesday night at Nobu, one of Southern California's trendiest restaurants.

Software entrepreneur Ellison is worth an estimated $106 billion, making him the sixth-richest person in the world, according to Forbes magazine.

Meanwhile, Musk comes in first with a net worth of $266 billion.

The couple might dine on crab tempura for $58, Maine lobster for $70, or a New York steak with mushrooms for under $92.

Nobu's multi-course tasting menu will set you back just under $200.

The wealthy billionaires were probably discussing Musk's withdrawal of his proposed acquisition of Twitter, which has become the subject of a bitter legal battle.

The Silicon Valley company sued Musk in a Delaware court to force him to buy the company at the agreed price after he sensationally walked away from the deal last month.

Ellison, who contributed $1 billion of Elon's $44 billion takeover offer, had received a subpoena from Twitter in the past two weeks.

The veteran tech billionaire has been embroiled in a legal battle that is set to begin on October 17, Bloomberg reported.

Twitter lawyer Bill Savitt slammed Musk as “a liar trying to fabricate an exit from a deal that never had an exit.”

But Musk claims he walked away from the deal because Twitter avoided providing information about the number of fake and spam accounts operating on its platform.

Twitter's lawsuit alleges: “By staging a public spectacle to sell Twitter, and by proposing and signing a merger agreement favorable to the seller, Musk appears to believe that, unlike all other parties subject to Delaware contract law, he is free to change his mind, undermine the company, disrupt its operations, erode shareholder value, and walk away.”

Delaware courts have in the past forced prospective acquirers to honor signed merger agreements, although the facts of each case differed.

In 2020, Tiffany sued LVHM, the luxury goods company's parent company, after the group tried to back out of a deal to buy jewelry maker Louis Vuitton.

The lawsuit was settled out of court after LVHM agreed to complete its acquisition of Tiffany for a slightly reduced price.

Because Twitter and the company Musk is using to complete the merger are both formally incorporated in Delaware, Twitter's lawsuit is scheduled to be heard in Delaware Chancery Court starting in mid-October.

The lawsuit accuses Musk of committing a “long list” of violations of the merger agreement that “cast a dark shadow over Twitter and its business.”

Legal experts say that based on publicly available information, Musk's negotiating methods, such as not conducting traditional pre-merger due diligence, appear to have given Twitter an advantage.

Musk has taken a lot of flak from Twitter in the merger furor, recently tweeting a series of meme images mocking the company's attempts to force the deal.

Twitter has hired the high-powered law firm Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz to pursue its lawsuit against Musk.

Wachtell's hiring gives the firm access to attorneys Leo Strine and Bill Savitt, who previously served as chief justices of the Delaware Court of Chancery.

Delaware's Court of Chancery hears non-jury cases overseen by a judge called a chancellor.

They often address business disputes, and many large U.S. companies, including Twitter, keep their headquarters there even if their main offices are located elsewhere.

The Twitter case is likely to be concluded within a few months, as equity courts cannot award punitive damages and generally hear cases more quickly than criminal trials.

Musk has hired the law firm Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, which defended him in a 2019 defamation lawsuit, and is now representing him in Tesla-related litigation.

Musk's retraction, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, alleges that Twitter repeatedly failed to respond to requests for information over the past three months or get Musk's consent before taking actions that affected the company's business, including firing two key executives.

Experts speculate that the move may have been an attempt to drive down the price: Musk initially offered $54.20 per share in April, but the stock's market price fell to $36.81 after the deal fell apart.

Twitter Chairman Bret Taylor later tweeted that the board was “committed to completing the transaction” under the current terms of the agreement and said he was “confident” of a win.