Jump to content

Eagle1993

Moderators
  • Content Count

    2824
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    104

Everything posted by Eagle1993

  1. This is a very good point. Will the TCC be allowed to release all of their data by council? TCC has held that back, I think due to mediation privilege. Also, is the detailed Claro assessment on the docket? I haven't seen that either. I found it odd that BSA would publicly release this analysis. I had a chance to read most of it last night and mentioned where I think it falls apart when they use prior settlements. However, I do agree that it presents the insurance side of the equation. Perhaps making all of this public to non mediation parties may be fine. Generally, I fully
  2. I don't think BSA cares; however, here is what they put in the plan. Why? Green is well connected to BSA's law firm. The Coalition is clearly the group trying to get the plan passed.
  3. When I read this I see it as having several audiences. First is Judge LSS as a real attempt to keep the current plan/vote alive. I don’t know how feasible that attempt is (it feels a bit like a Hail Mary at halftime of a football game). It probably won’t work but doesn’t hurt. However, I also see this document as a negotiation tactic to set a starting point for the next round of negotiations. It balances out comments from the TCC to ensure BSA’s position is known publicly. My main problem with the analysis is there has never been an organization that went to court to defe
  4. I believe many COs filed claims and fall under Class 9. It could be a ballot to vote.
  5. What a great story! If only we had invention merit badge still ... I tend to think he could be one of the few to earn it.
  6. Sorry to hear the news but your attitude is great! I hope you do find a unit to help out as any unit would greatly benefit from your support!
  7. To me, good call by the judge to hold a hearing right after the final vote tally. Note that I don't believe this is good news for the current plan. If there were no issues, the judge would likely have skipped the meeting and let confirmation to go ahead as planned. I do think this is good news for all sides that the judge will not let something fester without stepping in and providing some sort of guidance.
  8. Status hearing set. 1 day after the final vote to be tallied. 9d224c6c-9bc1-4eec-98e9-c99d2f8ce961_8250.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com)
  9. During the RSA hearing, this was one of the items the judge threw out as not acceptable. BSA put it back in anyways and said further arguments during the confirmation hearing. I would be shocked if it stayed in based on JSS's initial comments. For the BSA, I doubt they care if the Coalition is paid off in the end. It was the offer that was needed.
  10. Just to clarify how big this document is .... BSA's law firm initially said that claims are worth up to $7.1B ... now BSA's law firm is saying <$3.6B. It is meant to counter the TCC's expert witness who is saying claims are worth $24 - $30B ... on the low end. There is a major disconnect on the value of the claims. If this is now becoming a bottom's up exercise (vs an ability to pay exercise) then I would think some non bankruptcy court may need to decide the answer. BSA has initially been focused on top down allocation ... this is the max National can pay. This is the max LCs
  11. To me, if JSS has major issues with the voting results, she needs to provide feedback next week. If she believes the voting result is sufficient to confirm, then I support her in letting the confirmation process go forward. She is far more experienced in this than any of us, she knows the law and she should be able to make a decision next week if the vote was sufficient. What I would not want to see is JSS making a ruling in March that the vote was not sufficient to confirm the plan. Now, if she is ok with the vote but has issues with the plan, that should come up during the confirma
  12. I've seen this on both sides and it is annoying. These are high paid and experienced law firms, so I expect they believe it does have some impact, but I expect JSS is pretty good at ignoring those parts of the filings.
  13. That is exactly what I saw; however, I wasn't able to read the whole document yet. Also, when they were 60% liable .. many times COs were the other liable party but they never included that value in the settlement. However, in this case, they are including CO coverage. So that is part of the reason I question the valuation they are using. Personally, I think they are much better off arguing that $2.9M is the most they can pay. Arguing $2.9M is full compensation for 82,500 victims of child sex abuse is a much, much harder pill to swallow and one that will likely make it tougher to get
  14. The official Omni eballot or coalition's? What is odd to me is that the coalition created an eballot but yet all of their votes are direct? It just seems odd. Probably a good question is if the coalition discussed use of master vs eballot with BSA at all. If the coalition collected votes through their own eBallot then submitted them as individual ballots ... that is no different than a master ballot as both are coming from the law firm, not directly from claimants. Note that this is fine and acceptable, but if BSA or TCC questions master ballots they should also question firms that submit
  15. BSA went hard after master ballots. I think it will be interesting when Omni responses to discovery about what they listed as master vs direct ballots. I wonder if the direct ballots all came directly from individuals ... or did coalition law firms send them directly as individual ballots to try and allow BSA to reject master ballots? To me, a direct ballot was one where an individual either mailed directly or went to Omni's site and filled out the form directly. If a lawfirm was involved in either (by a lawyer filling out the ballot or sending an individual ballot on behalf of a cla
  16. I have not seen anything on the docket yet. I've never watched a bankruptcy so I'm not sure if judges typically ignore requests like this, really looking at the debtor to run the show. Perhaps she thinks ... if the debtor wants to spend the next 5 weeks spending money on a plan that will fail, that is their call. OR ... perhaps she is going to say 66% was her target, this was very complex, minor tweaks plan & approve it? My best guess (based on no experience in this area) is that she wants to avoid any debate about preliminary vs final vote. We are only 6 days away from seein
  17. Similar for my council. For Scouts BSA, less of an issue; however, would definitely impact camporees ... so definitely a negative impact but perhaps managable for strong Troops. For Cub Scouts, losing local council camps, can kill their camping program. What I was told, for Cub Scouts, is the idea of buying a large warehouse location that could be used for scout offices and a Cub Scout camp (indoors). Indoor tents?, climbing walls?, trout pond? Not exactly sure as it was a rumor.
  18. #1 - You have to watch their wording carefully. They said the plan, as written, does not comply with bankruptcy law. However, they do not say you cannot have non debtors included. While they didn't come out and say it, I believe this came up previously. They may look for a LC by LC, CO by CO release. So each individually must buy into the settlement. It is not clear, but some have argued that you then need the funds from the LC or CO go to claimants from that LC and CO and voting is confirmed by LC/CO. Again, this combines objections from various law firms so may not be the final p
  19. Just a reminder where we are in terms of schedule. The TCC asked to have a status hearing Jan 12 or sometime soon but so far no response from the JSS. I think the big date will be January 17th. Perhaps Omni made some major errors that could swing the vote %. I wonder if the judge will wait until January 17th, see the final voting report and then utilize a status hearing to provide tea leaves as to where this plan stands. Dec 29 Deadline to serve discovery on voting, settlements Jan 4 Preliminary voting report Jan 5 Rebuttal expert rep
  20. This is in part why I don't think LCs can count on the ability to just hide all their properties over the next 2-3 years to add restrictions and protect them from bankruptcy. These properties are all now clearly documented. There is a BSA document indicating which are currently unrestricted. It is clear most if not all of these councils are at risk of bankruptcy. To try and shield them will be tough. Now, if they want to take loans out, sure. They can sink them down to 100% debt but at that point they have liquid assets that are unrestricted. This is what national did to their HA ba
  21. What can the status hearing provide? I would think, at minimum, the judge could indicate if the % accepted votes is going to be enough. I do remember a prior hearing where the judge remarked about a section of the plan where she said something along the lines ... I marked up that section a lot and have a lot of concerns, we will address during confirmation ... so perhaps some tea leaves there?
  22. I’ll add that I disagree with this, not that it matters. I believe that if you get the major law firms on board along with the TCC you can get to 90%. However, there is a risk of permanent hold outs. Zalkin agrees with TCC with the need for a status hearing. They mention that further review of the votes will actually make the vote appear to fail even more. Their major objection is the 40,000 Charter Orgs and their insurance that is covered saying there is no subject matter jurisdiction to allow it. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/e7b1fd8f-7a
  23. I think that is part of Kosnoff’s point which is why he says it will end in Ch 7.
  24. Regardless of the side you are on, I think everyone would like to avoid waste. I really think it would help for JSS to start declaring what the court thinks of the plan. She frequently indicated she wanted to see where the claimants are at. It would be great if she: - Clarifies if non debtors can still be included post Purdue AND if that includes both LCs & COs (I see a world where she may agree to one and not the other) - Clarifies what % approval she is looking for ... she doesn't have to lock in a number ... but a comment that may allow parties some direction - Appoint
  25. 5e2eaa72-1e31-4d5f-a951-ac5a90474218_8190.pdf (omniagentsolutions.com) TCC is asking for a status conference January 12 to get the court's feedback as to the go forward plan. Basically, should everyone admit failure on the current plan and focus on mediation.
×
×
  • Create New...