Lawyers for Elon Musk and OpenAI (OPAI.PVT) gave their closing arguments in Musk’s lawsuit against the AI startup and CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman on Thursday.
The three-week-long trial held before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the US District Court for the Northern District of California focused on Musk’s claims that he donated money to OpenAI to help get the company off the ground with the understanding that it would remain a nonprofit.
Instead, Musk claims Altman and Brockman turned the company into a for-profit with the help of one of its largest investors, Microsoft (MSFT).
Musk is accusing his fellow OpenAI co-founders, Altman and Brockman, as well as OpenAI itself, of a breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment. He has also accused Microsoft of aiding and abetting that conduct.
In his closing statement, Musk’s attorney Steven Molo repeatedly hammered on witness testimony related to Altman’s trustworthiness and whether he was deceitful in his relationships with fellow executives and board members.
Elon Musk stands in an elevator to attend the trial in his lawsuit over OpenAI for-profit conversion at a federal courthouse, in Oakland, California, U.S., April 30, 2026. REUTERS/Manuel Orbegozo/File Photo · Reuters / Reuters
Altman was briefly removed from his role as CEO of OpenAI in November 2023. At the time, the board accused him of not being consistently candid with its members. Altman was reinstated as CEO days later.
“Sam Altman’s credibility is directly at issue in this case … If you cannot trust him, if you don’t believe him, they cannot win. It’s that simple,” Molo said.
During his statement, Musk’s attorney referred to Altman’s responses under cross-examination on Tuesday, saying that the CEO didn’t immediately provide a direct answer when asked whether he was trustworthy. Molo also noted that Altman said he didn’t think he misled people he did business with, rather than providing a more forceful answer.
He also critiqued Brockman’s testimony during the president’s cross-examination, saying Brockman’s responses were indirect, long, and rambling.
OpenAI’s attorney, Sarah Eddy, argued in her closing arguments that Musk abandoned OpenAI in 2018 when he left the company and that witnesses repeatedly testified that Musk did not condition his donations to OpenAI on keeping it a nonprofit organization.
She similarly claimed that Musk was more interested in being named CEO of OpenAI rather than continuing to operate it as a nonprofit. Eddy also referenced Altman’s testimony that Musk mused about wanting to control a 90% stake in OpenAI and turning the company over to his children if he died without a succession plan in place.
“He wanted dominion over AGI [artificial general intelligence],” Eddy said.
The jury in the case will render a verdict early next week, but its ruling will be a factor Rogers considers before she issues her own verdict.