Jump to content

Patch Trading Central

Have a patch or memorabilia you're looking to swap? Use this virtual patch trading blanket. (This area is intended to facilitate memorabilia swapping, not necessarily commerce.)


376 topics in this forum

    • 1 reply
    • 653 views
    • 1 reply
    • 813 views
    • 1 reply
    • 803 views
    • 1 reply
    • 871 views
    • 1 reply
    • 1.1k views
  1. need blazer button

    • 1 reply
    • 1.2k views
    • 1 reply
    • 1.4k views
    • 1 reply
    • 1.3k views
  2. TAC CSPs in early 1970s

    • 1 reply
    • 1.7k views
    • 1 reply
    • 1.1k views
    • 0 replies
    • 912 views
    • 0 replies
    • 786 views
    • 0 replies
    • 892 views
  3. Sênior Scout

    • 0 replies
    • 2.4k views
    • 0 replies
    • 887 views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • Right, this is why my Council Key-3 told us: the plaintiffs (or most) WANT a settlement that leaves BSA alive. Liquidation means Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation comes to protect the BSA retiree/pensioners and they re first in line and plaintiffs/their attorneys get the scraps of whatever is left, which won't be much.
    • The claimant's attorneys want the largest possible amount placed into a Victims Trust Fund, so they have the economic motivation to file as many claims as possible and argue that, within the totality of claims filed, all are valid.  The insurance companies want the lowest possible amount placed into the Victim's Trust Fund, so they have the economic motivation to uncover fraud and other facts that would diminish the value of the totality of claims filed.  In a way, the BSA is somewhere in-between, because it wants to see justice done for victims via payments, but also wants to retain sufficient funds and assets in order to reorganize post-bankruptcy.  The lawyers for claimants and the insurance companies will present effective arguments during the private negotiations from the extreme ends of the case -- indeed this is probably already going on.  If there is no agreement among the claimants, insurance companies and BSA, the Court will eventually decide what total amount it believes is required to fund the Victim's Trust Fund and force it on everyone in a process having the delightful technical term of "cramdown".  Or, the Court could determine there is a gross insufficiency of funds and the case could be dismissed and converted to liquidation.  As I've shared before in more detailed postings, despite the public relations rhetoric of some claimant attorneys, claimants would get less under liquidation because in liquidation BSA current and future retirees are in "first position" via a federal agency. As to CynicalScouter's thoughts on the BSA expressing its views on the degree of fraud in a court filing, the BSA cannot be forced to do so and really would not benefit by doing so.  Whatever the BSA thinks about the veracity of the claims in totality can be argued privately during the negotiations. One last item is that individual claims will not begin to be processed by the bankruptcy trustee until after the total amount of the Victim's Trust Fund is determined and mostly-funded.  At that point the BSA is more-or-less out of the situation, because it will be the claimant's attorneys vs. the bankruptcy trustee as to whether and how much an individual claimant should be awarded.  If the Trustee awards too much to individual claimants, it will drain the trust fund too quickly and run out of cash -- looking pretty stupid in the process.  If the trust fund was to run out, the BSA cannot be required to contribute more.  I suppose former BSA personnel or volunteers might be accessed as witnesses in those trustee proceedings, but the BSA and councils (only the ones that contribute to the trust fund) will have already had their liability discharged at that point. 
    • @scoutldr, I think that's the prevailing attitude around here. Pitts burghers aren't much for pleasantries. They aren't mean, but their sense of equality-through-work-ethic leads them to shrug off titles. All that said, my second job involved collaborating with cardiologists throughout the country. That involved a lot of phone time with receptionists. There was one in Georgia who insisted on using "Sir", but in a way that was incredibly friendly -- real southern hospitality style. I felt so good after getting off the phone with her, that I started using "Sir" and "Ma'am" in normal interactions around here in Steeler country. I only got push-back once ... a bus-driver called me out. I explained, "Ma'am, you got me through town safe and sound. For that you deserve my utmost respect." She said she'd make an exception for me, but I'd better not let it catch on. I think I only really infected Son #2 with the mannerism. It worked quite well for him.
    • I think and I'd want clarity here there are three options. 1) BSA stays out of this, files nothing for or against insurance companies motions. The problem is that the media can and already has tarred BSA with "Denying victims" when it is the insurance companies making the argument. 2) File briefs in support of insurance company motions to reject/disqualify claimants. 3) BSA is somehow compelled by the court to file its statement for or against. I know sometimes the court has the power to ask for other party's input generally.
    • No. It is an honorific, nothing more, as the Congressional Research Service alluded to. And it is an anachronism All a Congressional Charter does it authorize the entity to operate/do business. This is like arguing that you should be able to sue the Secretary of State of Delaware anytime a Delaware incorporated entity is a defendant in a lawsuit. Today we think of incorporation as this easy thing to do. In early U.S. history corporations had to be chartered by the legislature one-by-one. (There's an old story about how Alexander Hamilton pulled a fast one on the New York legislature when he incorporated the Bank of New York and included language "or for any other lawful purpose" and use that as an excuse to build a water system that would never have otherwise been approved). Most states have at this point enacted state laws of general incorporation. Go to the state's Secretary of State, pay your fee, file some paperwork and POOF you have an incorporated entity. The federal government has no such thing, thus federally incorporated entities must still be incorporated one-by-one by Congress.  
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...