Jump to content

    • You requested information about the unanimity of the decision that could be of help to the plaintiff's attorney's.  Hopefully, everyone sees this.
    • I disagree.  Jeff Anderson has already shown he is willing to battle an Archdiocese for 4 years over $55M.  LCs have billions.  It will take a large settlement offer (or National BSA liquidation) to avoid 3-4 more years of litigation.
    • Actually, he's purportedly or ostensibly representing your Council and all the others, as the Chairman of the AHC. If you want to remain beyond reproach, avoid all possible appearance of conflicted interest. Take it as you like. As I said, I was pointing out  something that may be of interest. To me, whether as a claimant, attorney, spectator or person interested in the future of Scouting, it's worth noting. Perhaps he was the one and only option to chair the AHC and be the lead negotiator in contexts that include the major creditors. Again, what do I know...
    • If Mr. Mason is representing his council than his sworn duty is to represent his council, irrespective of what other clients his very, very large firm may represent.  I always find it unseemly to question the integrity of someone in our profession without evidence. To your original question, in a group of hundreds of councils there's certainly going to be a wide variety of opinions.  My understanding in my own council is that we'll end up paying in order to put this all behind us, and there really isn't a good alternative.  I suspect that's the median position.  It's a very open question of law whether the councils are or are not so controlled by national that their assets have to be treated as if they're national's assets.  It would take years and at least an appellate court decision to settle that.  I doubt either side will see it as in their interest to roll the dice and go that far.
    • Yup, they were part of the committee that worked on the guidelines.  
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Create New...