(Christopher Hiester)

Former AIG CEO Wins Lawsuit Claiming Bailout Was Illegal, But Gets No Payout

Nearly four years ago, as America was still crawling out of the crater left by the collapse of the economy, a former CEO of AIG — a company whose name had become synonymous with the crash — sued the federal government over the bailout, alleging that the government had violated shareholders’ Fifth Amendment rights. Today, a court sided with wealthy investor Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, but he won’t be getting any damages because the company would have gone bankrupt without the bailout. [More]

Former AIG CEO Loses Bid To Sue Fed Over Bailout

Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, former CEO of AIG.

More than five years after AIG received nearly $200 billion from taxpayers to prevent the insurance giant’s inevitable collapse, and a year after the company finished repaying that money, its former CEO is still attempting to sue the U.S. government and Federal Reserve over this very bailout, saying it violated shareholders’ Constitutional rights and that the Fed violated Delaware state law. Today, a federal appeals court dealt a serious blow to his case. [More]

AIG's newest ad campaign

Fresh Off Paying Back Bailout Money, AIG Thinks About Suing U.S. Government

At the same time as AIG thanks America, quite literally, in new ads boasting about the company’s repayment of its $182 billion bailout by the taxpayers, its board is reportedly getting ready to decide whether or not to jump on a $25 billion lawsuit filed by AIG’s former CEO against the U.S. government. [More]

Former AIG CEO Sues U.S. Government For $25 Billion Over Takeover

Former AIG CEO Sues U.S. Government For $25 Billion Over Takeover

The one company that will forever be linked to the financial meltdown in the final years of the last decade is AIG (or American International Group, if you’re not into the whole brevity thing), which was bailed out and then effectively taken over by the U.S. government. Now a company led by AIG’s former CEO has filed suit against the feds, alleging that said takeover was unconstitutional. [More]