Judge Says AIG Has Trouble Proving SICO Case

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.

In his testimony, Greenberg said SICO received its shares as part of the incorporation of C.V. Starr Insurance Co. and SICO, which remained private entities, and the integration of publicly held insurers that formed AIG in 1970.

Wells, in his re-direct examination yesterday, questioned where Greenberg got his information that AIG had sought to end its relationship with SICO after Greenberg was forced out of AIG in the midst of an accounting scandal. Greenberg said a hostile relationship that developed between the two companies was one of the major reasons for ending the compensation program.

Wells also raised a question about whether an attorney for AIG's outside board of directors ever told Greenberg that it was not a good idea to have an outside company pay compensation to AIG employees.

Greenberg has stressed that while SICO is a financial vehicle, its ultimate goal is to fund a charitable trust, the Starr Foundation. Wells attempted to shake that contention, saying there was nothing in available documents to show that there was any mechanism in place to enforce that goal.

Attorneys for both sides indicated that they should wrap their questioning of Greenberg today.