NU Online News Service, June 6, 3:33 p.m. EDT
NEW YORK–Attorneys presented their versions of truth today, as summations began in the lawsuit between American International Group and Star International Company over whether SICO broke a promise to provide deferred compensation to benefit AIG executives.
AIG lead attorney Theodore Wells accused former AIG Chief Executive Maurice Greenberg of lying on the witness stand, while SICO attorney David Boies said AIG fabricated the story that the trust was created for AIG executives.
"He [Mr. Greenberg] took an oath. I submit that it was all false testimony," Mr. Wells said.
Meanwhile, Mr. Boies in reference to AIG's position said, "AIG has made this [the trust] up for this litigation."
At the three-week trial before Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. Federal District Court in Manhattan, the jury is being asked to decide if AIG's one-time sister company, SICO, broke a promise to fund a deferred compensation plan that provided an incentive for employees to remain at AIG.
This morning, Mr. Wells hammered away at Mr. Greenberg's credibility on the stand, saying he repeatedly lied about the nature of SICO. During more than a week of testimony, Mr. Greenberg contended that SICO was awarded more than 1.9 million shares of AIG stock when the entities were formed, back in 1970.
SICO, a private company, used a portion of the profits to fund a deferred compensation plan. SICO stopped the program in 2005, when Mr. Greenberg was forced out as president and CEO of AIG, because the companies were no longer working together.
In his summation, Mr. Wells contended that Mr. Greenberg lied and SICO conspired to falsify documents in order to cover up the truth about the intent of SICO's holding of the stock.
Mr. Wells told an attentive jury that through 35 years of speeches and letters, Mr. Greenberg repeatedly stated the purpose of SICO was to provide a deferred compensation plan for employees of AIG.
He said SICO put safeguards in place to protect the plan from being liquidated by future generations for their own personal gain. He also pointed to calculations made by auditors that determined how long the plan would last.
All these facts, Mr. Wells contended, provide evidence that the plan's sole purpose was to benefit AIG and not for the perpetuation of SICO.
SICO's attorney, Mr. Boies, began his summations this afternoon, contending that none of the shares that were set aside for employees were ever in danger of being lost for their retirement.
Mr. Boies contended that mention of a trust for AIG never existed until SICO sued AIG for return of artwork at the AIG headquarters. He said this countersuit by AIG is "their retaliation" over the artwork.
Judge Rakoff said he expects to conclude summations today and hand the case over to the jury for deliberation.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.