Eagle1993

2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Yep. BSA's done.

Yes.  It’s over.  13,000 claims since YPT.

TCC will ask court permission to sue JP Morgan over their loans as they have legal issues (for example Philmont).

TCC is not interested in the future of the BSA.  Their job is to maximize the payout.  However, they plan to require the BSA to release their ineligible volunteer list.

They are recommending each individual to prepare and start filing lawsuits against:

• COs
• LCs
• Individuals

April 15 will likely end up not even approving the plan for a vote ... far too many issues.

They have worked with 18 sex abuse bankruptcies .. there have been 0 cramdowns.  Judges do not do that to sex abuse claimants.  So, essentially, the bankruptcy will only be accepted when 66% of the claimants approve.

11 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

In case anyone is interested, the TCC, in preparation for tonight's Town Hall, just posted its summary of sexual abuse claims.    From TCCBSA.COM :

http://www.pszjlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/BSA Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims.pdf

This helps lend context to much and also the view of the effectiveness of YPT.  Please remember that it often takes decades for victims to come forward and declining numbers are not necessarily an indication of effectiveness, but rather the reality of men not prepared to address their abuse at a young age. 

There are more claims here against the Catholic Church than all of their bankruptcy settlements combined.  Most councils have appear to have enough claims to drive them into bankruptcy if court cases can proceed (depending on their state).  It would be interesting to see claims by year by council.  COs as well.

Over 3,000 claims in the 2000s.  Many of these are recent enough to pursue criminal charges.

10 hours ago, ParkMan said:

If two Scouts who are friends get together and work on a requirement together, no-one is going to tell them to stop or that the activity doesn't count.  The problem is that if two scouts who are friends get together and something happens, a lawyer is going to try to pull the BSA into the lawsuit.

100% agree.

I have never told scouts not to meet and work on advancement together.  Many times, I suggest scouts work together outside of our meetings in small groups (i.e., reach out to our Troop Guide to review your knots, etc.).  I see this like any sport ... would anyone tell a kid not to practice soccer with his friends?

My issue is that YPT is written in a way that scouts working together on low risk activities appears to require 2 adult leaders.  Technically one could argue that one scout should not call another scout to discuss their patrol flag design without two registered adults on that call as that call would be a scouting activity.

Currently, we do not interpret it that strictly but I could see others would disagree.   I wish they would update YPT/G2SS to allow flexibility of scouts meeting on their own for low risk activities.  In town patrol meetings, in town short distance hikes, etc.  I'm fine with requiring adults for overnight campouts or higher risk activities ... but let the scouts meet together without parents/adults breathing down their necks.  

14 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Forgive me if this is duplicative. The TCC and BSA reached an agreement for the production of rosters.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/877749_151.pdf

According to someone, this is because the TCC lawyers get $850K a month in fees  ... so they are in no rush to close on these decisions.  

29 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

One thing I've been puzzling through, and haven't seen a good explanation of is whether or how a universal settlement now prevents currently unknown time barred claims in non look back states from being opened in the future if a state changes its SOL and does a look back period.

If anyone has seen a good explanation please share it.

I think it makes sense vs National as the old National BSA is gone.  Good question about local councils as they technically didn't go bankrupt.  There would be a settlement for the 95,000 claimants ... but if someone wasn't part of the national bankruptcy could they still sue the local council?

26 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I just do not see how BSA is going to get 66% OR a federal judge to "cramdown" against sexual abuse victims/claimants. The optics would be horrific.

USA Gymnastics' bankruptcy judge is (I believe) currently considering a motion on whether to order a cramdown after 99% of claimants REJECTED that organization's Chapter 11 plan.

100% agree.  Note the USA Gymnastics' case was a $250M offer for 500 victims in January 2020.  The judge is pushing back hard against the USA OC and said don't use your insurance companies as a crutch ... dig into your wallet.  See that date ... January 2020 for nearly $500K per victim.  BSA's offer is $6K per victim.  No judge is going to use a cramdown with that low.

 If BSA doesn't simply give up, I expect this to last well into 2022 or 2023.  There is 0% chance this ends this year unless BSA files Chapter 7. 

The big question ... will LC lawsuits be on hold until 2022 or 2023.  I doubt it ... if the judge rules they are separate entities (National & LCs) and doesn't see fast progress to a settlement, its hard to see how she can continue to bar the lawsuits against LCs from proceeding.  There is already pressure to lift the hold now ... I cannot imagine she bars lawsuits beyond this year.

My one, slight fear right now....  The summer camp we use and love is owned by a council that would likely be sued into bankruptcy (just a guess as it is in a populated area in a state with a generous SOL law).  Those are the lawsuits that will really hit our units.  Right now, its just interesting forum discussions and has no impact in my unit operations.  It gets real with LC and/or CO lawsuits.

7 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

So, there are two components to a prospective award from the Settlement Trust:

1) BSA award component, as described; and

2) The "go fight the insurance companies" and see what you can get component.

Yes?

Yes.  Only that the "go fight the insurance companies" adds a clause that there are non settlement trust fights against the insurance companies and the $$ must be shared between all.  

What was mentioned, now my multiple insurance companies, that the BSA's plan did not detail out HOW the Settlement Trust would operate post bankruptcy.  They mentioned BSA had listed an appendix but it was blank.  Therefore, BSA does not have a "plan" that could even go to a vote.  A second insurance company group joined Hartford, objecting to BSA's submission. They are asking for an review and determination on claimants before proceeding and saying BSA's plan cannot go for a vote until this is done. 

BSA is essentially arguing none of this matters as they are running out of money so vote on this by August or they will liquidate in September.  They are requesting the judge approve the plan for a vote (I believe in mid April).  Voting would take until mid July and a court hearing late July would decide the fate of the plan.  

What are real risks vs negotiating tactics .. who knows.

20 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I have not heard this. I don't think it's accurate, but I will ask. If so, I would think the number of cases in NY and NJ would have really exploded when they opened. If you're right, I could've sued in one of those two jurisdictions, prior to filing. Another inquiry for me to pursue. If that is true, every one of us with a pre-1978 claim which is a bunch, has a stronger claim and cannot be flagged as time-barred in the bankruptcy. Hm...

 

 

 

There were  a bunch of articles at the time.  https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/investigations/boy-scouts-sexual-abuse-investigation/77-6b587579-410a-4f37-a9a0-d7f3cb0000b6

"On December 1st, New Jersey is giving people who say they were abused more time to file suit. The statute of limitations is changing from age 20 to age 55. That's significant because the national headquarters of the Boy Scouts of America was in New Jersey from 1954 to 1978."

16 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

The SOL for criminality should not exist. Obviously we cannot open that to past cases, but the SOL for the criminal behavior of abuse  should be eliminated from this day forward.

I agree with that ... in my mind I was thinking civil.  There is no SOL for murder and there shouldn't be one for child sex abuse in terms of criminal charges.

57 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

On the other hand, when the Methodist church on Main Street in every small town has to liquidate because it once chartered a Scout unit, some other unit in the Council had multiple cases of abuse, and every other related organization is bankrupt, defunct or has immunity, there may be more general political will to reintroduce or re-strengthen Statutes of Limitation.

I think that depends.  If it’s due to people in their 20s and 30s coming out and the perps are still employed by the Methodist Church most would say let them go bankrupt.  If the perps are dead and the victims are in their 50s+ I tend to agree there would be SOL pushback. 
 

IMHO, I don’t agree there should be no SOL but at the same time, 21 seems far too young.  If you were raped at 11 it may take until your 30s to really seek justice and that should be allowed. It may take longer but there is a trade off at some point.  21 seems too early. 50 seems to late. 

My understanding is that in 1978 and prior, BSA had its HQ in New York and New Jersey.  Both states have updated their SOL. So, for any abuse nationally, 1978 and prior, lawsuits against National could pursue. Post 1978 it would likely then go per state law.   Now there are 30+ states with their own SOL changes.  

Now the question is, since BSA is declaring bankruptcy, did they give up the right to defend against abuse after 1978 and outside the current state’s SOL?  Is that the 57,000 reference?
 

Is this another $11M legal fee for the BSA?

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/877519_2330.pdf

Interested in seeing assets of various councils (at least based upon financial disclosures).  You can see them here:

https://www.causeiq.com/directory/scouting-organizations-list/

Note that single councils could have multiple lines of entry.

4 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I think TCC counsel was taken completely by surprise when the claim numbers skyrocketed. It is a complex case, no doubt. Other than those who assert that "each BSA sexual predator likely abused an average of 100 victims," no one I know expected this. I believe that rough average has some "lifetime of a sexual predator" research backing it up, but extrapolating it across every application and context is scientifically and statistically disingenuous. 

He who shall not be named noted this 100x potential in press conferences back when, particularly at the presser launching AIS. HWSNBN clearly intended to create this choke point in the case. I honestly don't know if it was purely to control the case and max out the 40% bank run or ensure he could crash it. In so doing, the crew of hedge fund aggregating miners have ensured the attorneys billing the Estate hourly can take the case to the bank. Sad definitely sums it up. As I said above, I watch those monthly applications for fees and expenses and shake my head. They faithfully roll across the docket straight to the accountant stroking checks like so much confetti flying around a ticker-tape parade.

What surprised me is an hourly billing rate for lawyers of $1,195.  Paralegals billing at $425.  Is that typical? One lawyer billed 96.9 hours and made $116K. When people talk of the 40% of any settlement going to lawyers, they are not even including these fees.  Since BSA is paying these directly + their own legal fees + 40% of the settlement ... I can only imagine lawyers are likely getting 50% of the available assets of the Boy Scouts of America.  

This is tough to stomach.  

FYI .. this guy has a history of cashing in as a victim trust lawyer.

https://wislawjournal.com/2013/01/25/archdiocese-of-milwaukee-wants-judge-to-stop-payments-to-attorneys/

Just saw a document for the TCC fees.  December 1 through Dec 30 ... 1 month.  Total fees, paid out of BSA's funds, $850K.  Nearly $1M a month for the TCC lawyers.  

Kosnoff is posting their info on Twitter as he is calling the lead lawyer of the TCC #mrCashIN.  It appears he believes their goal is to simply extend the bankruptcy indefinitely as they make $1M a month in fees.  This is regardless of a settlement results.

Now he is pushing for liquidation of National to remove any protection of LCs where he believes the big $ is.

This whole thing is sad .... its time for the Judge to start making some decisions.  Sounds like April could be a major month.

15 hours ago, PACAN said:

There is not much if any of a COVID reduction.   March numbers reflect recharters which in this case LDS would account for the majority of the reduction.  End of March 2020 total was 1143000,  Dec 1199425 which is likely some of the fall recruiting.

 

Yeah, I am really interested if this is pre or post Covid.  Most recharters didn't really become official until January 2021.  That is when the real impact of Covid would show up.  For example, my Pack went from ~50 scouts in December 2020 to 24 scouts in January 2021.  I expect many others as well.  However, the 2020 numbers are so low ... I really hope they include Covid. 

I do concur that we should see a rebound this fall.  I plan a major push as we get back to outings, indoor meetings, etc.  

15 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

I live in Ohio.  For something like the VRA to pass would take a massive change in the political landscape.  Just a few years ago we tightened SOL rules for even basic contract cases.  For a state like Texas the shift would have to be even larger.

Texas agree for now, but that can change in 10 - 15 years.

All you need is a case where someone raped a bunch of kids, was known by the institution but nothing can be done due to SOL (ie, they came forward at 21).  The public will scream and legislation will pass.  

There are some pretty Republican states that have SOL reform passed, so it is not necessarily a R vs D discussion.  When the discussion is nebulous, it is easier to ignore and see this as trial lawyers vs great institutions.  Once you have real names, stories and a pretty big instance of negligence, the pitch forks will come out.  If I were an LC, I would look to get out via settlement now.  Otherwise, every major donor may be asking when not if I would be hit by lawsuits.

6 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I'd submit that the separate legal structure is there - but the professionals in the BSA have really confused it.

I'll also state that having separate LLCs does not mean they are necessarily separate.  For example, my company has 100s of LLCs ... but if my company went bankrupt, they wouldn't be able to say certain LLCs are not bankrupt as they are 1 corp.

Given that, I do wonder what is the legal framework.  I think the financial side is concerning.  For example, can a council leave BSA, take the council assets and join a different scouting organization?  Lets say BPSA ramps up and my council takes its camps, employees and assets and redeploys them to generate BPSA units.  Is that allowed?

 If you equate this to the franchise model ... owners of franchises can clearly take their profits/assets they own from one franchise business and use it for other, different franchises.  I've seen this when an owner left a Quiznos to open up a Subway.  This is where the franchise model gets murky in BSA as I don't believe councils have the ability to keep all of their assets (post rebranding).  Is that enough to not call them legally separate, I'm not sure.

7 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

The various and specific Charter Rules and Regulations, especially the rights to subsume assets upon disbanding, do not bode well for a finding of independence. I'm not saying this as a claimant, just trying to look at it as objectively as I can.

I guess my question is about Catholic Dioceses.  They have been going through bankruptcy and treated separate.  Why wouldn't the same apply to LCs?

Just now, scoutldr said:

 I have always heard that our scout Reservation was donated to our Council in 1958, and the deed specifies that if it is ever no longer wanted/needed, the deed is to revert back to the family.  

That was my understanding, but if so, why did the BSA simply not provide the clear documentation of this to the TCC?  Also, if that is the case, how could the BSA use it as collateral for a loan?  If BSA defaults on the loan, the land would go back to the family and the bank would be left with nothing. 

I hope it's true, but it may be lore or not legally binding/documented. 

11 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

If memory serves, individual councils paid insurance premiums to National, so National would be on the hook for claims.

I think that is one of the debates in the courts.  To me, this is the #1 question on the table.  How liable are our local councils? 

My understanding that if the court determines that LCs are separate and there is no negotiated settlement, lawsuits could start against COs and LCs.  Then, the state court where those lawsuits are brought would determine liability on a case by case basis and results would follow state law.  If these cases then drive LCs into bankruptcy court, that court would take over for each LC.   I wouldn't be surprised that councils in certain states would end up in bankruptcy court if there is no settlement.  

Well, it should be easier to get our desired Treks at Philmont going forward.... assuming we still own it.