Excerpts from the depositions - Wall Street Journal

Case 2:11-cv-10549-MRP-MAN Document 254-1 Filed 03/28/13 Page 25 of 35 Page ID
#:16614
Deposition Testimony of James M. Mahoney
March 18, 2013
James Mahoney was the “business lead” for the FRBNY on Maiden Lane II.
• “A. That question has to do with my interaction as the business lead on the
purchases of those RMBS securities from Maiden Lane into the―from AIG into the
Maiden Lane vehicle.” 60:25–61:5.
• “A. I was the business lead and so I did not have the pen in drafting any of the legal
language. I relied exclusively on counsel for that.” 138:23–139:2.
• “Q. . . . [Y]ou would be among the persons most knowledgeable? A. Yes. I may be the
most knowledgeable. Because I―I pursued this from the very beginning, in
September 2008, through the closing in―in December of 2008 so . . . .” 99:21–100:4.
• “A. What I was involved with is picking the securities that would be bought in to
this Maiden Lane vehicle; the date at which they would be transferred; their
valuation date will be done with the cash flows that the securities generate between
the valuation date and the execution date; the prices at which things would be
transferred; how accrued interest and how interest on those cash flows that came in
between.” 139:3–14.
• “Q. [Davis Polk] was the law firm that was representing the New York Fed and ML II,
correct? A. That’s correct. Q. And . . . Davis Polk was orchestrating the legal
documentation for both ML II and ML III, correct? A. That was my understanding.”
242:8–16.
Mahoney repeatedly testified he had no discussions with anyone about transferring AIG’s
fraud claims.
• No discussions about transferring fraud claims with anyone from AIG.
• “Q. Do you remember discussing with AIG the idea of potentially assigning away
fraud claims that AIG may have had in connection with its purchase of those
RMBS securities? A. No, I do not.” 80:18–23.
• “Q. And you[] also, by definition, had no such conversations with anyone from
the AIG side, correct? A. That’s correct.” 82:18–21.
• “Q. Do you know if—do you know if anyone at the New York Fed or
representing the New York Fed ever told AIG in words or substance that the Fed
expected to receive AIG’s fraud claims or tort claims as part of the ML II
transaction? A. No.” 85:7–13.
• “Q. You didn’t have any discussions with anyone from AIG in which there was a
discussion that AIG was somehow giving up its rights to pursue a recovery for
that $18 billion loss against the institutions that may have wronged it; am I
correct? [Objection] A. It is correct that I have no knowledge of any
conversations like that.” 124:3–12.
• “Q. Do you ever recall having a conversation with Sonia Hamstra in which you
said to her that, as part of the ML II transaction, you want ML II to acquire or to
EXHIBIT 4
1