Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by ThenNow

  1. 3 hours ago, MattR said:

    I'm hoping this forum helps some of those victims.

    I want to compliment the Scouters who’ve been on this thread since I removed my invisibility cloak and have slogged through some challenging conversations. Some bailed out due to frustration and/or anger. We’ve come a long way. Allowing “us” to be heard and substantively contribute means a lot. As you know, no one else in the organization is really hearing us, much less engaging in dialogue from a motive of human understanding alone. They may be listening strategically, but that means little (to me). 

    • Upvote 1
  2. 2 hours ago, Life said:

    ive been following this forum for awhile now and just now decided to chime in. Seems like a calm before the storm so I wanted to pipe up. 

    Welcome. I am truly sorry for what you endured, now this painful saga. As you accurately said, at least now we are not completely alone, bumping around in the dark of our hyper-focused minds and muddling through. Come what may as the circus continues, we finally have a cohort, though we remain anonymous. It is better than we had and there is comfort in it, I believe. 

    • Like 1
  3. 10 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

    Since the Coalition was deemed a "mediation party" by the court the bar gets lowered on their making the substantial contribution claim.  That said, the US Trustee is doing his job by holding parties to the strictest rules for reimbursement.  Remember though that in many cases the Trustee basically "points things out" and then a party will provide a complete response to satisfy the Court.

    Part of the script for my screenplay. A fictional tale, or not. For now, let’s say it is.

    How bitter will be the irony IF:

    Coalition firms are found to have unethically, improperly and/or fraudulently amassed claims.

    They used venture money, aggregators and call centers to do the deed, failing to vet many claims, some of which are valid but assailable because of their poor lawyering. 

    Well before all that was discovered and proven - though suspected by insurers - the sheer volume of their client base gave them a mountainous soapbox from which they demanded access to the mediation. Access granted.

    Once in, things dragged on and dragged some more. They were feeling pressure to settle because, well, the clock is ticking and the piper always gets paid. 

    “Hey! Let’s find a path to compromise. I know we can do it and it’s for the victims, after all,” counseled the Coalition to the mediation parties.

    To themselves they whispered, “Yes. We surely must. It’s getting a little hot in here, if you know what I mean.”

    “Oh, goodie,” said the BSA and some other parties. Let’s make a deal!” (Did that include the TCC? Only the Shadow knows...)

    “So very gracious of of you to make all these concessions!” Exclaims the judge, bolting awake from a 14 month nap. “You are indeed benevolent people seeking the good of all humankind and sexual abuse victims everywhere. I hereby decree you have made a ‘substantial contribution.’ I wave my magic money wand and award you $10M. [Swish and flick! *PING*] 

    ”Thank you, your honor. Truly. You are most generous and we are humbled. Um. May we be excused for a minute or two?” bows the Coalition. “As it turns out, we need to see a shark about a horse’s head.”

    “Very well. I grant you leave,” said she, “but do remember to vote. Early and often.”

    To be continued...

    I am NOT reporting facts, only playing with the puzzle pieces to create a speculative collage. The pieces are there though. 

    • Upvote 2
  4. Random Observation I: I had no clue you guys had this much to say about cell phones in Scouting. I’ve been tempted to say, “Get a room already.” :) 

    Random Observation II: There has been an interesting concurrence of the camp distraction lull and luffing in the case. Harmonic convergence or interstellar alignment I’m thinkin. I have a slight foreboding.

    Carry on…

  5. 1 hour ago, ThenNow said:
    1 hour ago, yknot said:

    I keep saying that cell phones are the new Swiss army knife -- just a utilitarian item that can be used correctly or incorrectly.

    I get it, "why" vs. "why." I'll exit this part of the conversation saying I'm glad I learned what I know live and not from a Youtuber goober. (If you guys have cool videos there, I mean no offense. Low hanging rhyme I couldn't pass up.)

    PS - Lied about that “exit, stage left.” (Nod to Snagglepuss.) The videos I WILL watch are any you can direct me to where you’re opening a coke bottle, boring a hole in a stick through which you can thread a leather thong, whittling or opening a can of beans with a phone. I will be mesmerized and watch with rapt attention and awe. iPhone or Android, your preference. ;) 

    “I don’t care who you are. That’s funny right there.” Attribution withheld to protect my image. 

  6. 23 minutes ago, yknot said:

    I keep saying that cell phones are the new Swiss army knife -- just a utilitarian item that can be used correctly or incorrectly.

    I get it, "why" vs. "why." I'll exit this part of the conversation saying I'm glad I learned what I know live and not from a Youtuber goober. (If you guys have cool videos there, I mean no offense. Low hanging rhyme I couldn't pass up.)

  7. 12 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

    I often argue our expectations of the scouts should parallel the expectations of the adults.  If no phone charging stations means no adults, I'm not surprised at all that our youth membership is dropping.   ... BUT ... that's another debate that's been had many many times. 

    I know why we need phones for safety purposes and adult connection to work and family, but why does a Scout need a phone at camp? I’m glad I couldn’t search the web for lashing or Barred Owl mating calls or reflector oven biscuits or raccoon scat identification or any one of a 1000++ other video tutorials I could now fetch up. For me, as both a Scout and camp staffer, seems it would have been totally disruptive (and even destructive) of the positive things I took away from camping, Summer Camp particularly. No?

  8. 3 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

    …is at camp! I know I am!

    Sure. Thanks. Rub it in why don’t ya! Now that you say that, I was always at camp over the date on which my mother decided it was time to launch me into the great wide world of the unknown, the inexplicable and a place where I was soon forced to eat and sleep and poop according to the dictates of human convention. I always resented that. It was much easier before she went and did that to me. I think I’ll call her and remind her just how rude that was. Be right back...

    • Haha 1
  9. 56 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

    Has this channel been quiet for almost a full day?

    It appears so. Maybe everyone left us here to rot and wither in ignorance and lack of socialization due to some unexpressed desire for a sabbatical. Or, everyone is reading my article very slowly and translating it into multiple language for international distribution. Or, we offended the rest. Or, this all was settled amicably and no one told us. I’ve been vexing about this without explanation, other than my attempts to humor myself. 

    • Haha 2
  10. On 7/16/2021 at 10:44 AM, ThenNow said:

    Mass Tort Attorneys: Judges Want to Know About Your Outside Financing

    Here is the entire article, courtesy of a friend at Bloomberg. Worth a read. Makes me crabbier that this judge does not have an eye to the judges overseeing actual mass tort cases, as opposed to the same masquerading as a Chapter 11. Grrrr. 


    Law.com, Mass Tort Attorneys_ Judges Want to Know About Your Outside Financing.pdf

  11. 4 hours ago, gpurlee said:

    Assuming that the BSA survives and that the national UMC relationship is not damaged beyond repair

    Isn’t the damage TBD, based upon how far under the bus and irretrievable they become? Are they already out of reach, in terms of getting under the channeling injunction? If they start getting named and teed up to be lit up in the window states with no BSA air cover, it’s kaput, ja? It doesn’t feel to me like BSA is going to reach back and fetch COs at this point. If they did opt for a rescue, what would it entail? My view on all this is overly simplistic, I know.

    Last disjointed thought. Though it may be better for some survivors to have open season on COs, I don’t see it as a great benefit to all. I may be missing it. The whole scenario also looks pretty cold hearted and two-faced from my club chair. Let’s see. A Scout is trustworthy. Strike that. Hm. Loyal? Never mind. Start over. A Scout is helpful. Debatable, but I’ll give them that one through and abundance of grace. Friendly, Courteous and Kind? Nah. No gimmes. I’ll let them run the table from there, with the exception of Brave. Definitely not Brave...

  12. 25 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Practical: it is going to be hard enough to get an agreement involving BSA plus 250 local councils. Trying to get a global plan (including all the COs) is just not in the cards right now. The attorney for the Ad Hoc Committee of Local Councils talked about "phases" and that the first phase was focused on BSA and LCs but that now that those were settled (they aren't, but anyway) attention would turn to getting a plan/deal for the COs. As you can imagine, and what I was told by my Council with respect to the Catholic diocese in my area, the COs are not buying it.

    Sorry. I spoke too fast. Yes. That was my multi-headed beast point and confirms my sense of the why. It seemed clearest and most logical to me and the legal makes perfect sense. Thanks.

  13. 37 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

    There are multiple points of contention between the chartered organizations and the BSA at the present time. Perhaps the most contentious one is a court filing a few months ago as part of the restructuring plan. It included a section that discussed insurance and chartered organizations. It is important to understand that for decades chartered organizations were told that "the BSA has your back" and would provide adequate insurance.

    It came as a shock to the CO's to discover that the BSA was essentially stating there was no insurance coverage for past claims.  Three reasons were stated and varied according to the specific year. (1) The CO's were not listed as an additional insured, (2) the insurance coverage for a specific year had reached its cap and was exhausted or (3) there was insurance but the CO was responsible for "very high deductibles."

    You can imagine that faced with the prospect of thousands of potential lawsuits, this was not well received news for the CO's.

    So now, many of the CO's are joining in the refrain of "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on ..."

    Thanks. I apologize that my smart alek question made it less than clear. My real question is, knowing how critical the CO relationship is, why the “get off the bus, Gus”? That was even better.

    • Upvote 1
  14. 1 hour ago, gpurlee said:

    If the BSA loses the support of the chartering organizations, it is difficult to see how it can successfully move past the impacts of the bankruptcy and the pandemic.

    Okay. No surprise. Several of you saw this percolating and said as much. I only have old school CO points of reference, now adding those you guys have given me. Other than being engaged in a cage match with a multi-headed beast, is there any good explanation for this redux of “Throw Mama from the Train,” sans Danny and Billy with COs playing the mothers? (It’s strained, I know, but I had to get that film title in somehow!)

  15. 1 minute ago, MYCVAStory said:

    Let's trade.  I'm headed to a cardiologist next week after an "abnormality" turned up.  I'm looking forward to when he asks "Have you been under any stress lately?"  "Well, do you have a few hours so I can summarize it?!"  Enjoy, safe travels, and happy hunting!

    Prayers headed your way, brother!

  16. 2 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

    Someone let Kosnoff know he can tweet his apology re the TCC not holding meetings when he thinks best.

    Thanks for the invite. I’m off to Puerto Rico. Hopefully, I’ll do better than Century’s PI in locating him and the boat at his club. In any case, expect my future posts to have a gentle, Coppertone glow about them. I’ll report from seaside…

  17. I don’t know who to quote on this so I’ll just put it here. The entire funding of claims aggregation and mining and whatever you want to call it, coupled with the need to examine lawyers and claims to see what’s hinky, makes me sad and angry. I’m sure that was not apparent in my recent post. Thought I’d clear that right up.

    Plucked this from law.com, but I no longer have full access, so here’s the banner splash. Best I can do while I appeal to my friend at Bloomberg to let us in. Forgive this jumbo font. Still waiting for that tech consultant following my appointment to the entire C Suite for all things BSA Chapter 11 and BSA overall. My wife asked twice about her island. Can anyone expedite my elevation and coronation? Please?

    Without further ado, this is the extent of my web plucking:



    Mass Tort Attorneys: Judges Want to Know About Your Outside Financing

    At least three federal judges in multidistrict litigation have asked plaintiffs lawyers to disclose third-party litigation funding. “The minute you have an involvement of someone else," U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm, in the Marriott data breach cases, told Law.com, "you have the benefit of funding, but with that funding, there is a question about is there to be control or not.”

    As rule makers and politicians continue to debate about whether to disclose third-party funding in multidistrict litigation, some federal judges have forged ahead in requiring plaintiffs lawyers to do just that.

    In the past year, judges in at least three cases have ordered such disclosures, in most cases as part of the process of appointing plaintiffs attorneys to leadership teams. The three MDLs involved include some of the largest mass torts in the country.


  18. 20 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Some of this is just sloppy lawyering (mass approval of the claims in a frenzy of last minute signing)

    Yup. AND, sloppy lawyering that utterly flaunted the judge’s admonition, toothless I might add in retrospect, that she “better not see a hundred signatures by attorneys...I never signed for my client in all my years of practice,” to paraphrase her statement. Looming bar date or not, get your poo-poo together and prepare your signing hand for a two month recovery from clinical writer’s cramp!

  19. 13 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    But the point of the insurers, and I'd point out some of the victims lawyers now, is that it isn't the Trustee's job yet. The Trustee doesn't have a job until 2/3rds of (voting) claimants approve the plan and that at least some (many? most?) of those 82,500 voters shouldn't be voting in the first place.

    I didn’t say this current examination of the potential shell game isn’t allowed, appropriate or potentially productive in the hands of the insurers. I said (meant) the eventual validation of “all the peanuts, rotten or otherwise,” once this camel does its thing and reveals what it does or doesn’t, is not the insurers’ b’ness. Yes, I assumed that actual transition to the Trustee phase, but my point is they cannot be allowed to play The Great and Powerful. The actual is waiting in the wing somewhere, or maybe the green room, drinking bourbon and talking Cosmos club speak with his fellow play-yahs.

    • Confused 1
  • Create New...