This is exactly the right question. It's clear that Jeremy is not and has never been a formal shareholder in Cruise.
The question is whether having explored (and subsequently abandoned) a potential co-founder relationship constitutes sufficient basis for an equity claim.
I think the majority of this (counter)claim is that Jeremy provided critical IP to the company as consideration for (promised) equity. That makes the issue more complicated, unless Cruise can prove that they threw out 100% of the intellectual property he brought in during his short tenure.
