WORLD Law Direct Forums  



Go Back   WORLD Law Direct Forums > Forum Information > Law News
REGISTER FAQ Calendar SEARCH Today's Posts MARK FORUMS READ
Personal Lawyer Legal Forms Forum Archive

Law News Breaking law news and events.

Consult Your Own Personal Lawyer Now!
Reply
AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 04-17-2008, 09:40 AM     #1
News
 
WSJ_law_blog's Avatar
 
Last Online:
07-16-2008 12:37 PM
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
Posts: 362
Default Are Prosecutors Telling Warren Buffett How to Run His Company?

With Eliot Spitzer cast out of politics, do his prosecutorial tactics live on in U.S. Attorneys’ offices around the country?



According to the WSJ editorial board, the ousting of Gen Re CEO Joseph Brandon, whom prosecutors named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the fraudulent reinsurance transaction between Gen Re and AIG, is proof that they do.

Here’s the back-story: Last week, Law Blog colleagues Amir Efrati and Karen Richardson reported that federal prosecutors were pressuring the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, the chairman of Gen Re parent Berkshire Hathaway, to replace Brandon after four Gen Re executives were found guilty in February for allegedly using reinsurance deals to inflate the reserves of AIG, Gen Re’s biggest client. After the trial, the prosecutors said they would “work up the ladder” to ferret out wrongdoing.

On Monday, Brandon was forced to resign, despite, according to the WSJ editorial board, being “a superb manager.” In his annual letter to shareholders two months ago, Buffett wrote, “Now, thanks to Joe Brandon . . . the luster of the company has been restored.” Buffett added that Brandon and President Tad Montross “have been running the business for six years and have been doing first-class business in a first-class way, to use the words of J. P. Morgan.”

But, regardless of Brandon’s track-record, his resignation, reports the editorial board, was a foregone conclusion. Fiduciary duty to Berkshire shareholders required Buffet to avoid a criminal indictment of Gen Re at any cost. And U.S. Attorneys can pressure companies to fire executives as a show of cooperation. Georgetown Law prof John Hasnas says prosecutors rarely if ever tell corporations to fire their target. But all they have to do is to suggest that they are considering whether to indict the corporation, and that the extent of their cooperation will be considered in the decision, and “the message gets across.”

“We have come to a strange pass in this country,” writes the editorial board, “when prosecutors who can’t prove their case can nonetheless tell Warren Buffett who can run his companies.”

Last edited by top_admin : 06-16-2008 at 10:29 AM.
WSJ_law_blog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Add Forum to Google Toolbar | Format Your Messages

Posting Rules

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
crazy wife telling lies Unregistered Child Custody & Support 10 05-21-2008 09:01 PM
Federal prosecutors wld_wiki Law Wiki 0 05-20-2008 10:47 AM
Are Books and Movies the Right Venue for Prosecutors WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 05-13-2008 10:10 AM
Prosecutors Behaving Badly WSJ_law_blog Attorneys & Legal Ethics 0 03-13-2008 04:10 PM
telling a friend, could he report me? Unregistered Miscellaneous Topics 1 09-04-2007 11:51 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:32 AM.


Top crime attorneys

Subscribe

Use of the Forums is subject to our Disclaimer which prohibits advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, and false, harassing or abusive statements. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of WORLD Law Direct. Questions and information submitted in the Forums are assumed inquiries for general information and not legal advice.

Copyright 2000-2008 by WORLDLawDirect.com, Inc.