CynicalScouter

It was the TCC that demanded it as part of the RSA/Plan 4.0 in order to get the TCC onboard. BSA’s Plan 3.0 was to give time barred claims 1% of claim value per the abuse matrix. So the “Tier 1” abuse would be $6,000-$27,000

There is “difficult” to overcome the statue of limitations and there is impossible. That scale came in from the TCC lawyers professional opinion on what the real possibility was to find a way around the limitations. Places like Alabama were listed as “closed”: no chance. Etc.

Exactly. There is this magical:fantasy idea that all that needs to happen is to get the 50000+ time barred claims into state courts and suddenly a) all the statutes of limitations will go away and/or b) the insurance companies will pay millions per claim. even in the scenario @Muttsydescribe we are talking 50-100k. Not the millions and millions. and the idea that somehow you’re going to threaten insurance companies with court is a joke. First you have to find a lawyer willing to work on contingency in the face of a case where the statute of limitations ran out decades ago. Then you h

In state courts one usually follows the other. This from my Utah courts friends Disclosure and discovery are mixed in time, in approximately the following order: https://www.utcourts.gov/howto/courtprocess/disclosure-discovery.html initial disclosures; fact discovery; expert disclosures; expert discovery; and pretrial disclosures. "Approximately" is doing some heavy lifting here, but you get the idea.

For now when their state Supreme Courts strike them down as unconstitutional look out. The fact is it is a fantasy a pure pure fantasy to suggest that suddenly all the statutes of limitation are going to go away or that 100% of victims will get 100% of claim value. just think about the example you used that there are carriers handing out 50000 to 100000 that’s a far cry from millions and millions.

I mentioned in a prior post that some letters of intent included some restrictions

And this would be their response "Based on prior history of claims against Catholic dioceses and other similar situations, we reasonably believed that such payments of hundreds of thousands or even millions were well within the realm of possibility. How we were to know that BSA had just so many victims that the money would divide down to nothing?" And by the way, that exact point (other abuse victims got these kinds of payouts, so should these victims) is exactly what TCC has said in its filings.

They will always couch it with "up to" "as high as", "prior victims got as much as". They cannot guarantee specific amounts or levels, but they can couch it. That's why the comment from one of the aggregators "Our target is at least $100,000". Sure it is. My target's the moon. Doesn't mean I have any reasonable chance of making it if I jump real high.

But not the rules and procedures of BSA? Interesting. Did you ever read or sign an annual charter agreement?

Silverstein just referred to the "Purdue issue" and "Purdue analysis". Wheee!!!

Stang is saying if the BSA refuses to renew the LC charters, all assets convert to BSA. However, as I and others pointed out, the LCs have not all adopted that language and will fight tooth and claw to keep those assets. Stang wants to wait on this until confirmation.

For those who insist that the BSA can just declare all LC assets belong to BSA and then liquidate, BSA brings up a point that was brought up before: there are a LOT of state laws that would prevent that from happening. This is in the context of the liquidation issue

There is talk about this issue of where the money goes, what they are calling "pooling". Talk about source "Weighing" where, for example, MOST of the contributions from LC will go to pay off those claims coming from that particular LC. BSA wants that all shoved off until confirmation but note this which certain seems to lend itself to the "big pot of money, but with weighting". Everything BSA is saying at this point is "wait for confirmation, let's just get to the vote".

Stang says he is sending the BRG council-by-council aggregate claims value to BSA in chart form now. And he's promising discovery requests about how on earth the Hartford and LDS deals were cut.

But EVEN WITH those, I don't see how you reduce $30-$134 billion to only $2.1-$7 billion. And even if it is that low, why would a victim accept it when they were assured hundreds of thousands if not millions. Zalkin just said: he's thinking he can settle for millions NOW against Orange County Council and Hartford. Why on earth would he take this deal?

Zalkin is using an exact claimant to explain why this entire process is garbage using an Orange County Council claimant in 1977 and a Hartford insurance plan with no aggregate limits. I believe he is changing the names to protect the victim/claimant. This is very LC focused, and his point is that the LC is getting away with something. $44 million assets and his victim. Zalkin is confident he can get settlement for millions and a jury trial for $7-10 million against Orange County Council. It is reasonable for him to ask and BSA to explain: why is $44 million in assets only r

I think I head earlier that the LDS funds were being guaranteed for only LDS claims. Not sure.

The BSA's math doesn't add up. I think this is Stang's point. If I merge the data from Fifth Amended Plan pages 148-149 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/010161cd-594e-4b9e-8c88-a7402b49cf4d_6212.pdf And Exhibit F of the Fifth Amended Plan https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/3fa71e64-3562-4885-99ea-d71178ab2f0f_6224.pdf Tier Type of Abuse Base Matrix Value Maximum Matrix Value Unique and Timely Abuse Claim Count by Allegation

I don't know. Is it: BSA + LC = big pot of money? That would seem that the larger councils would be supplementing/carrying smaller councils. BSA + LC = big pot of money + 251 smaller pots?

I have no idea and no idea where to even find it

Modified: ”A victim was subject to [ABUSE TYPE REDACTED] in 1977. He would normally be entitled to somewhere between $600,000 and $2,700,000 for this abuse. HOWEVER the abuse took place in Alabama which has a closed statute of limitations therefore he would only get perhaps $60,000 - $270,000. Moreover because BSA and all local councils are only contributing $x,xxx and there are YY other victims the actual amount that this particular victim would expect to receive is $15,000 plus any funds recovered by insurance companies at some later date.”

That Is another question not answered. I know they specified that the LDS contribution will got to only LDS claimants, but that is all.

Only if you’re in a state with no or a relaxed statute of limitations. in 24 states the Legislature is never ever going to lift that statute (due to state constitutional provisions that ban such look backs ). in the rest, maybe you get a victim or even a few dozen to sue the LC. Then the LC simply goes into its own Ch 11. Again, there is no scenario here where all victims across 50 states get 100% of claim values.

There was talk about providing illustrative examples I wonder if something like this would work: ”A victim was subject to [ABUSE TYPE REDACTED] in 1977 he would normally be entitled to somewhere between $600,000 and $2,700,000 for this abuse. HOWEVER the abuse took place in Alabama which has a closed statute of limitations therefore he would only get perhaps $60,000 - $270,000. Moreover because his council is only contributing $x,xxx and there are YY other victims in the council, the actual amount that this particular victim would expect to receive is $15,000 plus any funds recovered

Or it will be "$15,000 + additional recovery from insurance companies, maybe, someday in the future." Yeah, they aren't going to approve. You never get to 66% of most victims, who were lead to believe there was billions to be had and that they would be getting amounts closer to hunderds of thousands if not $1 million+ (USA Gymnastics, Catholic Dioceses, etc.) are instead looking at $15,000 and a pinky-promise of maybe more money some day.