Jump to content

CynicalScouter

Members
  • Content Count

    2042
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    48

Everything posted by CynicalScouter

  1. If I had to guess it is going to be to convert to facilities use agreements with the councils serving as COs
  2. Kosnoff has got to be reading this forum. He's claiming these 16,869 attributed to Eisenberg etc. are HIS 17,000 clients/AIS' or...something. That's why the math didn't work: because Kosnoff's claiming those 16,869.
  3. Just saw on Reddit. Michigan Bishop tells Methodist Churches to stop rechartering scouting units: BSA is "leaving their Chartered Organizations out on a limb by themselves." BSA-ltr-to-Local-Churches-7.20.21[1].pdf
  4. Right, the RSA accounts for that. Whatever deal gets cooked up with the COs, either side (BSA/LCs on one, TCC/FCR/Coalition on the other) can walk away from the RSA if they don't like it.
  5. So, I'm trying to parse out what got amended and the key seems to be 6 items. Item 1 (I.A.) simply resets the deadline for the judge to approve the RSA until August 27. Fine. Items 2 & 3 (I.B. and I.C.) deal with whatever agreement is struck with the COs and gives both sides the power to terminate the RSA if they don't like what they see. Here's the TCC/Coalition/FCR's version. Item 4 changes Reimbursement, but I don't see how. Item 5 changes some language about insurance rights. Was: Now Item 6 DST Note Mechanics Was Now So
  6. Ok, I know the general rule is no posting pictures unless they are relevant, but I'm posting the JPEGs listing all attorneys and the number of claims that are now party to RSA 2.0 (hereinafter the Zombie RSA). I just cannot see how Kosnoff can claim he represents 17,000 people. The only thing, and this is a guess, is that this is counting number of CLAIMS and not number of CLAIMANTS? Or the lawfirms listed are over-inflating their numbers? I just don't get it.
  7. He didn't. And I think that's the question of the Rule 2019 motion tomorrow: How many people does Kosnoff REALLY represent? The math is just not adding up here.
  8. 1) The amendments change several items. 2) BSA was trying to line up all these claimant counsel and ran out of time?
  9. The point I think is that number reached the 2/3rds needed (82,500*2/3=55,000) in order to approve this plan.
  10. This is the global deal BSA has been begging for. Lawyers representing over 70,185 claims have now agreed to RSA 2.0. It is listed as Schedule 3 in RSA 2.0 document. FIRM CLAIMS Slater Slater Schulman LLP 14170 ASK LLP 3277 Andrews & Thornton, AAL, ALC 3009 Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. 16869
  11. This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants (67,000 out of 82,500).
  12. RSA 1.0 is dead. Behold: RSA 2.0 was just filed! Reading through it now. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/ebb2c5f5-b7ba-4976-827b-ced854f51e1e_5813.pdf 1) This version adds State Court Counsel representing at least 67000 claimants 2) 30 days for judge to confirm (August 27) or it lapses again. 3) There's a new item added: if either side disagrees with the way in which the COs are the dealt with in the reorg plan, either side can walk and the RSA is void. This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants
  13. Final note: even though the RSA is dead, more and more attorneys for victims are continuing the file objections to it in case it comes back. I count at least 18 filed objections or joinders to the main objection with as I said 1000+ claimants. This plan is dead folks.
  14. Talk about bouncing the rubble here. More attorneys are filing objections to the (now dead) RSA/joining in on the main objection filed. My count indicates that attorneys representing at least 1000 claimants have now filed against the RSA. Why? This was the main objection https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/85fba864-aa4d-42f2-b58f-b811b917c9e4_5682.pdf Of all these, I'll just focus on two: C and D and I'll take D first. In short, under D, there is no way a Settlement Trustee should have the unfettered power of a trial judge to decide the value o
  15. They are listed and hyperlinked in the Notice as Item #3. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/f95e4e86-78ce-4d19-be88-7cb86c87df68_5810.pdf
  16. Have to say I am surprised that the media has not run this story yet. Even the bankruptcy focused media has been from what I can see silent.
  17. Nice. This is just epic level trolling. The insurance companies have now filed a supplement to their Rule 2019 motion that consists of nothing but Kosnoff's tweets mocking the judge and indicating that he (Kosnoff) is the one truly in charge of the 17000 clients. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/861e377e-a772-42e9-8779-1b90257e5fab_5804.pdf
  18. Sure, it could have been that there were enough people who had problems that no one could agree. Just based on the court filings the issue was the Coalition payment, but there may have been a slew of other problems behind the scenes. I would note that the attorney for the Ad Hoc Committees for Catholic Dioceses and Methodist Churches (same lawyer, different committees) was pretty irritated when he noted the Ad Hoc Local Committee for LCs and BSA has said that the RSA was not the real, final plan and that work would be done with the COs. His point was (paraphrasing) what are we doing here
  19. So, with only the Rule 2019 motion left for tomorrow, let's see what that means. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/5047339b-0dff-47e3-8939-4bd5f4cf3406_5802.pdf In short, this gets at a problem that has been rolling around for over a year: what exactly is Abused in Scouting, its legal status, and who speaks for those abuse victims? And what is the relationship between Abused in Scouting and the Coalition? And oh yeah, his constant insulting of the judge? The Insurance Companies made sure the judge is aware of it. And the insurance companies eve
  20. Right, as recently as July 26 you had a brief filed by the TCC/FCR/Coalition in support of the RSA https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/0d7f3457-6371-48c1-98d4-07c0cd63a58b_5760.pdf And on July 22 they filed in Joinder in support of BSA's brief https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/cb5ac036-4493-4999-bba6-faf70eed01ee_5680.pdf But the opposition to the Coalition being prepaid ahead of everyone else was universal and included the US Trustee. If I had to guess, the parties to the RSA were re-negotiating the Coalition payment. Those neg
  21. I agree that SOME kind of RSA is possible to be brought back and I mentioned as such earlier. Perhaps one where the Coalition isn't pre-paid/paid ahead of abuse victims. The broader point, however, is that even if it is brought back, there is still enormous opposition, not just from the insurance companies but others including some victims attorneys about some key aspects, especially the voting rights of victims in closed states and that the COs are absolutely livid at the RSA and the plan it contemplates. Sure, it can come back, but BSA has also been squawking about how it is soon o
  22. Kosnoff is on a tear tonight. Liquidation remains his only answer
  23. Amended notice of July 29 hearing posted. RSA is officially not on for hearing. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/6bc5e503-8c0f-4a0c-9750-e0d11b194949_5796.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...