Posted on 06/15/2015 5:16:28 PM PDT by Nachum
Earlier today, former AIG head Hank Greenberg's long-running legal battle of the US government came to a dramatic end when in a 75-page ruling, U.S. Court of Claims Judge Thomas Wheeler found that Greenberg was indeed correct in claiming the government overstepped its legal boundaries in its "unduly harsh treatment of AIG in comparison to other institutions" which was "misguided and had no legitimate purpose."
But because “the question is not whether this treatment was inequitable or unfair, but whether the government’s actions created a legal right of recovery for AIG’s shareholders" Wheeler found that Greenberg was not owed any money as AIG would have gone bankrupt without the government's forced intervention. Greenberg was seeking at least $25 billion in damages for shareholders.
The reason for the case is that years after the initial $85 billion bailout which eventually ballooned to $182 billion, AIG - with the government's explicit backstop and thus zero credit risk - managed to repay the government bailout funds and the government with a $22.7 billion profit. Greenberg argued that the pre-bailout equity holders deserved a piece of the pie, very much the same way that Fannie and Freddie stakeholders are also arguing they too deserve a piece of the post-government bailout pie.
However, “in the end, the Achilles’ heel of Starr’s case is that, if not for the Government’s intervention, AIG would have filed for bankruptcy. In a bankruptcy proceeding, AIG’s shareholders would most likely have lost 100 percent of their stock value" the judge found, and admitted that the pre-government bailout equity value of financial companies - since all of them were facing bankruptcy without a bailout - was zero. Whether this opens up the door to a class action lawsuit by all those who were short financials into the bailout and were then
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
So!!!! WTF is going to happen? NOT A DAMN THING.
The horse done already left the barn.
Shades of Marbury v. Madison. The Court finds the government did something manifestly unconstitutional or illegal. Pages of that. Then says, “but you still lose.”
bttt
But there were no consequences to the government for the violation. “What difference does it make!?”
Do you have any idea who owned AIG? He is from Omaha.
Can anyone name a top official at any of the financial institutions that lost their PERSONAL fortune? I’m talking broke, no home, etc...
“claiming the government overstepped its legal boundaries”
This is a joke, right? Overstepping is standard operating procedure.
No, AIG was and is publicly held. Hank Greenberg was probably the largest shareholder at the time, but no individual owned more than 5%. The overwhelming majority of shares are held by mutual funds.
Several guys lost more than 90% of their money. However, they had billions or hundreds of millions.
AIG should have been put down. Derivatives can be extremely toxic. Something that the EPA should be working on instead of CO2.
Then what would have happened to the tens of millions of people who had life insurance policies with them? It would have been a giant mess.
someone should have been selling life-insurance policy insurance.
So in the end, all they will get is BUPKIS!
Just like the American taxpayer.
Bump
okay. so how does that work?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.