Judge Doubts AIG Proved Case Against Starr

Rakoff questioned the direction of AIG attorney Theodore Wells’ line of questioning, saying that in going over past testimony in an effort to impeach Greenberg’s testimony, he had not shown how speeches the former executive gave about the deferred compensation plan legally bind SICO to continuing the program.

“Whether [the program] was discontinued unilaterally or by mutual agreement…I doubt it would be a legally enforceable act,” Rakoff said about SICO’s ending of the program. He also told Wells that he questioned whether Greenberg’s statement about the program lasting 200 years made it legally binding.

“I’m extremely doubtful about it,” he said, adding, “I don’t think it legally holds him to it.”

Rakoff also seemed to be showing impatience with the pace of the trial, telling attorneys for both sides that from his review of the witness list, “So far, I am mystified why any of these experts have any relevance to this case at all.” He repeated “at all!” loudly.

SICO’s attorney, David Boies, wrapped up his cross-examination of Greenberg by having his client repeat his view that SICO created the more than 30-year-old compensation program to benefit a select group of employees and AIG itself. Greenberg testified that SICO paid the awards every two years at the discretion of its voting shareholders.