You are on page 1of 1
2 sso 1 coe SEA. starr INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, INC. "me “1 \75omr We are, of course, pleased that the trial court found that the Federal Reserve acted illegally, discriminatorily, and for improper political purposes in requiring AIG, and AIG alone, to surrender 80% of their equity as compensation for a Federal Reserve loan. We respectfully disagree with the trial court's legal conclusion that, under applicable appellate cases, there is no remedy for the Government's illegal conduct. The value of the loan to AIG, and appropriateness of a Federal Reserve loan to AIG, is not in dispute, The question at trial was whether the Government could demand the shareholders’ equity as a condition of that loan. The court properly held it could not. The court recognizes that requiring AIG shareholders to surrender 80% of their equity improperly cost the shareholders, and improperly enriched the Government by, more than $23 billion. The defendant's own expert testified that the Government received more than $18 billion from the sale of AIG shares that the court has now held the Government had no power to demand. Because the trial court found that the Government was not authorized to demand equity as consideration for a Federal Reserve loan, it necessarily follows that the Government is not entitled to offset the value of that loan against the damage done by the seizure of plaintiff's equity. Permitting the Government to do so would allow the Government to act illegally with impunity and without remedy or consequences Plaintiffs will appeal the ruling that there is no remedy for the Government's illegal conduct, and ask the court of appeals to confirm that the Government is not entitled to keep billions of dollars of citizens' money in its pocket. Incorporated in Zug, Switzerland