Contract Law in New AIG-Goldman Twist

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Joey says:

    I’m so sick of hearing about the mess those greedy executives created. They’re still trying to cash in on other people’s misfortunes, yet because of their connections and money, they are allowed to do whatever they want. When will the government finally start changing the corporate code to regulate their pay?:

  2. Query says:

    So why do you think AIG hasn’t sued GS yet? It’s getting bad legal counsel? GS is too big and bad to piss off?

  3. mark says:

    This seems premised on the “they overpaid” assertion, which seems legally incorrect. If A owes B $1 million and when it is time to pay, A could plausibly negotiate a lower number but B demands all of it in the nastiest way possible, there is no “overpayment”, just full payment. So there is no claim for money back. And if there is no claim for money back, the rest of this is just a matter of taste and wishful thinking and basically misses the legal point.

  4. Lawrence Cunningham says:


    My premise isn’t the overpayment assertion but the issue of the validity of a broad prospective waiver of unknown claims. In your example, if A also says it’ll never sue B for anything whether A knows about its current right to do so or not, and A later finds out B defrauded it earlier in theire relationship, has A given up its right to assert that claim? Maybe so, but that’s an issue, separate from any assertion of overpaying (which, I agree, does not present a legal issue that I can see).