Very interesting, I found the filing and looked at the details...this person was promised a bonus...there were signed spread sheets and memo’s etc...AIG broke their word and tried to get out of the contract-verbal and otherwise after they strung the employee along...the employee had an opportunity to go elsewhere for a substantial amount of money...so I still say they are hypocrites. Oral contracts are enforceable and legally binding...so I guess AIG gets to decide what is enforce and what is not...although they settled and did not ask for summery judgment. I do not agree with enriching AIG execs or others at bailed out banks with taxpayer money.
He got a 1.3 million payout in 2002, pursuant to written records, spreadsheets, etc. But there was NO corollary written record of a promise for 2003, and he was pushed out -- in a huff it appears -- months before the 2003 payout was made.
-- Oral contracts are enforceable and legally binding... --
Both sides have a case in this one, otherwise it wouldn't be in court. It seems the written contracts are in conflict with the oral one. In particular, Feilbogen signed that he had read AIG's employment manual, and that he understood the only payment promises that were legally binding were those that had been reduced to writing. Then he sued for enforcement of a disputed oral agreement that hadn't been reduced to writing.
Another "mistake" was telling his boss he had a better offer elsewhere, in order to leverage a doubling of the discretionary guaranteed payout. They took him up on it.
-- I do not agree with enriching AIG execs or others at bailed out banks with taxpayer money. --
Well then, advocate they all work for nothing. That's essentially what you advocate for DeSantis.