Jump to content

ThenNow

Members
  • Content Count

    827
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Posts posted by ThenNow

  1. 9 hours ago, MYCVAStory said:

    this is an opportunity for that to happen via more mediation next week and the hearing continued to a later date.  That's a win-win if anything comes out of it and lets the judge avoid an exclusivity decision until the BSA gets one last shot to find some agreements...or not.

    That sure sounds like it will require a pretty huge pivot by someone in the equation, which I believe has to be the BSA. I feel they have been avoidant, resistant, recalcitrant and less than deserving, for lack of a better word, of another at bat. As you said, “or not.” 

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
  2. 1 hour ago, qwazse said:

    The Catholic church right now is seen very positively -- almost better for having their warts revealed.

    This may be isolated and anecdotal, but my family has been in the Catholic church, well, always. I attended all Catholic schools other than undergrad and current masters work, including law school. Our youngest son went to a Catholic university. From all reports, especially from my mom, that doesn't sound like the case. Perhaps it is facially or casually, but shrinking numbers, especially in the younger generations don't necessarily support high esteem. I do recognize the younger generations have become far less "churched" overall, which is a big factor. My mom is extremely embarrassed and ashamed of the whole thing and now the Boy Scouts. She can't even talk to me about the case because it makes her so upset. The worts may have been revealed, but they exposed them kicking and screaming, ala, the BSA. I do not currently attend a Catholic church. My other non-Catholic siblings (who all left) and friends are nothing short of disgusted with both institutions. Maybe that's a small pocket of the universe... 

  3. 2 minutes ago, elitts said:

    The reason I think the fallout would be different is that I view much of the collective anger over the situation (as opposed to the anger any one victim might feel) as being directed at the BSA primarily out of a lack of a clear target for the "masses".  You can't pick any one perpetrator to be angry at for 80k+ cases, so instead that anger falls on the BSA which is a large faceless organization.

    Now I understand and that makes sense. Very logical. I see it could go either way, cases, facts, locale and players depending. If an accused abuser has any ongoing connection to Scouting or went on to be a pillar in the community, that could be a game changer. All sorts of facts and angles could alter the PR trajectory, I suppose. 

    • Upvote 1
  4. 9 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

    It's also different because it's actually intertwined with the prior Catholic diocese bankruptcies, and could potentially have a "second act" of dozens or hundreds of LC bankruptcies, and dozens or hundreds or even thousands of CO bankruptcies.

    Does that sway your thinking in favor of cramdown or are simply pointing out the additional distinction and complexity?

    10 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

    I do hold the BSA responsible for the exposure to Agent Orange and the resulting disease of Leukemia."

    I feel very badly for him, but if we start down this path, many, many of us could start drawing cause and effect flow charts that would turn the Gordian into Pandora's Box.

     

    14 minutes ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

    I also note that part of the reason some of the insurance-companies might not be able to pay tens of billions of dollars in this case is that they've already paid out huge sums in asbestos litigation, and other mass-tort lawsuits and bankruptcies

    Maybe. I don't pity or excuse them from trying, however. My experience is second hand through my wife's previous, long-term career phase in the insurance brokerage and carrier industry, but they will be fine. If not, as has been said, someone will buy them, take on the debt and roll it forward for future profit. 

  5. 43 minutes ago, elitts said:

    Personally, (and this is just speculation) I don't actually think that will have a significant impact unless there is a LC with a large number of recent cases or maybe if there are accusations of a particular LC actively pressuring or coercing victims to stay quiet.  That advertising spate last year did a pretty good job of publicizing the issue (at least in a general way) so I suspect many folks will now look at further court cases as "old news".   I think what's more likely to happen in the case of local suits is condemnation of the COs that had significantly higher than normal numbers of cases.

    Dueling perspectives, I know, but just a few more thoughts on why I don't think that would be the case. (Pun intended) If 5+ guys from my Troop who were abused by a guy who still lives in our town, which he does as do some of them I understand, that would be splashed all over the place. The details, accusations and drum beating by attorneys and the plaintiffs would spotlight not only things from the 70's and 80's but why Scouting may still not safe. On the ads, I know very few people who saw one, much less multiple. That may be a reflection of media choices and demographics, though. I think cases like that would have a huge impact, but then again I am a legend in my own mind and star in my own films. 

  6. 5 minutes ago, elitts said:

    The only time I've ever heard of getting interest from the time of an occurrence would be in cases of funds being taken for tax debts or something like that.

    I was being a smart aleck to show why I think that would be inequitable. Then again, my abuse happened 40+ years ago and I am my own attorney. I believe we got a baseline interest rate from the average time of claim payment denial in my class action case, but that was a negotiated settlement and the time frame was much shorter.

  7. 18 minutes ago, elitts said:

    But again, unless I'm mistaken, none of those Catholic church cases involved the judge in question refusing the discharge and dismissing the bankruptcy filing because an agreement couldn't be reached.  So how could there have been a precedent set saying "There are no Cram-downs in CSA driven bankruptcies"?

    I probably misunderstood. I thought you were simply saying the judge might well opt for Toggle B, if the BSA's Plan A goes out and is voted down. I was saying, in light of other cases where judges were loathe to "make" victims accept a Plan, I think TCC/Coalition Option C is the winner. I defer on the point and the specific details of the RCC cases. I do not know enough about those cases to blow my nose, as my dad used to say, and should yield where I am uncertain. Apologies. 

  8. 7 hours ago, MattR said:
    10 hours ago, ThenNow said:

     

    Who knows, maybe they're wasting too much time glued to scouter.com to find out what's going on.

    I’m thinkin not. There are tons of great ideas on YP in here, including MYCVAStory’s most recent. Surely all of those good ideas would’ve made their way into a Plan, no? [wink, wink]

  9. 27 minutes ago, yknot said:

    I don't see how any Chapter 11 reorg plan that doesn't seriously address YP issues going forward can be valid.

    Another reason why this is best left to the TCC and Coalition, and arguably only to them. The survivors want this in the Plan as one of the mandatory non-monetary Plan components. The BSA did not do anything at all to forward ideas and they had two wide open chances. Do any of you know why that is? I've not seen nor heard a peep from the Ad Hoc Committee about it either. I would think they'd be involved, since you guys are the ones doing the actual implementation and the AHC is supposed to represent all the LCs. I know I'm revealing my ignorance of the multiple levels of organizational dysfunction, again. 

    28 minutes ago, yknot said:

    I have also not seen where any plans have addressed the issue of affordable liability insurance. Who will insure any kind of scouting endeavor post bankruptcy reorg at an affordable rate?

    If the BSA did not have this in its Amended Plans I and II, I don't see the TCC and Coalition needing to take up the issue. BSA must not be worried about it. What is one to conclude? Shouldn't this also be a major concern for the AHC? For the 10th time, and I apologize, but I really don't understand what it truly is or does or represents. I know what it says it is, but I don't see that borne out in all of these gaps in communication, focus and consensus. Dunno.

  10. 14 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

    What do they have to lose in submitting a plan?

    Money. Time. Frustrating the judge. Muddling the process. Angering the tort claimants. Hastening the threatened "decent into chaos." And, is this Plan guaranteed to pass muster with 84,000 victim claimants? Isn't that one of the most compelling practical considerations fifteen months in, as opposed to a technical or legal ability to file a Plan? Having qualifications to file, knowledge of the case and a pathway to file, I'll assume that to be true, but why? For their benefit alone? Do they have a better track on unraveling the knot? The ear of the Coalition or TCC? Maybe. Haven't heard tell of such.

    • Like 1
  11. Just now, RememberSchiff said:

    When the Debtor's exclusivity period ends,  cannot any creditor may submit a plan?

    Regardless if they can, which I don't know, I highly doubt anyone else has one locked, loaded and nigh on ready to launch. She wouldn't tolerate more scrambling and shambling and delay. Well, I hope not...

  12. 46 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

    I really think we should open it up to the TCC and the TCC alone to submit alternate plans. 

    Do you mean the TCC without the Coalition? Assuming and hoping not to presume, that's not going to happen. Mr. Stang stated in open court that they are exchanging terms and coming to agreement on a Plan. If it's two weeks from file ready, that means they're well into it. Notably, Mr. Molten did not deny it and was tossed the ball if he wanted to bat it down. If it is co-sponsored, it's better able to get a ready thumbs up by the survivors, as well.

    • Like 1
  13. 39 minutes ago, elitts said:

    I kind of thought this drive to pass look-backs would fade fairly quickly when people started connecting the dots and imagined what could happen when school districts and state governments started getting sued.  It's only a matter of time until someone tries suing a state government over "campus rapes allowed by permissive, state-run schools, who abdicated their duty to protect their students".

    From my involvement in advocacy, which is admittedly limited to the last year plus, the fight against the state Child Victims Act(s) has been historically consistent from the RCC, BSA and others. I'm not aware of the private school involvement, but CHILDUSA would know. Culturally, and I'm not saying it's all good by any means, this trend of "accountability" doesn't appear to have reached any zenith. My take. I think it continues for a bit.

    44 minutes ago, elitts said:

    I have to think that most LCs have insurance policies of their own to protect against losses due to lawsuits. (I know mine does)  I mean, they are poorly enough run that I can easily believe some Councils don't, because they thought "they were covered by national", but I have to hope that would be a rarity.

    Excellent point. I think part of the ruination I see in my head and didn't express, beyond potential cash liability, is the impact on Scouting of one or many CSA cases in the hometowns, Districts and LCs across the country. Bringing these cases to the light of the courtroom is big time different than this bankruptcy. As I said, 16 current zeros is going to be a dwindling number when the 39,100 claims land in an their respective LC column. What will be the impact on registrations, fundraising, COs, staffing and volunteers when those things are reported on a daily basis in the Local Gazette, in addition to Reuters, WSJ, LA Times, AP, Bloomberg, and etc.?

     

    47 minutes ago, elitts said:

    Yes, This has been repeated ad nauseam by another poster.  The problem with this little saying is that we aren't talking about some mountain of past precedent spanning the last 50 years that would need to be set aside; rather, pretty much all you are talking about are a couple dozen Catholic Church bankruptcies since 2004. Given the scope of this one, it would be a pretty easy thing for a judge to say "This is a functionally different situation than the past CSA bankruptcies".

    Another great point. However, on the nose precedent is legit and that's what she has staring her in the face. 17 years and a couple dozen cases creating a consistent, unwavering precedent is not chump change. Honestly, that seems like a ton to me, especially with the culture of 2021 vs 2004. Also, in my view, the "functionally different situation," combined with the sheer magnitude of the case, in fact further mitigates against her breaking with precedent. Lastly, and equally important in light of those things, there is a competing Plan burning a hole in the shared briefcase of the TCC and Coalition counsel. Add those things up and cramdown would be another catastrophe for many BSA victims. If the BSA Toggle B cramdown stood as the single option, maybe. With the TCC/Coalition Option C, which can actually pass, I don't think so. Just my take, of course. Who knows what will happen. Only Judge Silverstein and then maybe not her as of this moment.

  14. 1 hour ago, RobertCalifornia said:

     

    Are there any minutes or a recorded zoom from the May 19 meeting? 

     

    I believe transcripts are delayed for a while as effectively proprietary to the court/stenographer. It’s recorded, but I think only for the transcription and court’s use. I’m guessing or vaguely recalling. Nothing is available right now as far as I know (which is approximately the distance between my keyboard and my nose on most days).

  15. 7 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I would think that the BSA has another more robust plan for survivors (remember the motto "be prepared").

    No time like the present and there may be no time at all if it isn't now.

    I haven't seen it noted, but the BSA's, as opposed to the TCC commissioned Berkeley Research Group's, assessment of net aggregate LC assets is $3.296B rounded. Of that, $1.427B is claimed to be restricted in one form or another leaving $1.896B unrestricted. I am so anxious to see BRG's comparative numbers I hardly bear it. I fear I will not get my wish, at least not for a good while. Alas. 

  16. 43 minutes ago, RobertCalifornia said:

    Local councils will go higher. They don’t have a choice. And, they are prepared to do so. They need a global settlement.

    I think so too. Ignorance may be blinding me, though. In part, hasn't the BSA created a huge dilemma for the LCs and COs by forwarding a Plan that has no support, risking the potential slide into their Death Trap B plan? If implemented, that launches them into the deep ocean, no? I'm rather surprised there isn't loud wailing and objecting from LCs, especially if they are willing to contribute more to get beyond this. If the TCC and Coalition aren't allowed to present their global resolution Plan of Reorganization, the LCs and COs are in a world of hurt. (See point three, below.)

    43 minutes ago, RobertCalifornia said:

    Insurance companies are the big problem. The Hartford deal is laughable. The fact that Century/Chubb is not cooperating is predictable. 

    Yes, they are "a" problem. Agreed as to sentences 2 and 3. 

    43 minutes ago, RobertCalifornia said:

    SOL’s across states are a mess. Depending on the state, you are “Safe On Litigation” or “S—t Out of Luck”. 

    As MYCVAStory reiterated and I said earlier, 39,000+ claims have yet to land in a LC column. They are hovering and will land, upping the numbers. One thing I am watching for gee whiz is how many of the 16 "0's"  (for claims not facially time-barred) are eliminated from the claims data chart. In my assessment, if an LC has even one viable, solid CSA case, it isn't "safe." I said this earlier, but all of these chickens haven't come home to roost and with an $18+/-M high water mark (so far). It simply doesn't take many successful abuse cases to change the entire complexion of the Scouting map or financial health of an LC.

    If I was an executive with an LC, I would be pounding on the BSA's front door to let me in with cash in hand and beg them not to launch me into the ocean. Again, 16 zeros in the non time-barred claim column will be shrinking. That is nearly statistically certain. My wife is a risk officer for a major health system. As I observe what she does, assessing and eliminating yet to be litigated claims is almost as big a part as managing live claims or liquidated awards. Big risk/little risk. Known risk/unknown risk. Which will it be?

  17. 55 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

    Something I still don't understand is how a TCC plan would handle the LCs.  What incentive would it provide that would lead them to contribute substantially more than is now being proposed?

    I don't know and can't really speculate. I do have a few thoughts as I look at it, both as a claimant and a former practicing attorney. If I were most of the LCs, after reviewing the data, I'd be pleading not to go Toggle B and asking for some other way, given the fact that the BSA Plan A won't be approved. Here are my thoughts:

    1) By my quick scan, there are only 16 LCs with zero active/not time-barred claims against them. That's just looking at the ledger portion showing individual LC claims and not those that follow showing joint claims. between 2 or more LCs.) They seem to be in a good spot if their states have low risk of opening up and they feel confident there aren't guys yet to come forward. Personally, I wouldn't be at all confident, but business and life are a constant game of "big risk/little risk" and "now vs then" analyses. (Start at pp. 323 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/213bd53f-b44f-45c9-97fc-246bcb7ca06b_4108.pdf)

    2) A single case of CSA against many LCs could sink or nearly sink the ship, asset base depending. $18+/-M is the high water mark for judgments, as far as I know.

    3) Again, super quick scan, but I see a fair number of LCs with over $10M and $20M in net assets and some with a couple hundred thousand. A few that jumped off the page on the high end are Atlanta Area with $85M, Crossroads at $53M and Silicon Valley at $45m. I didn't look closely for any with more as I quickly scrolled. (Start at pp. 265.) They can withstand some hits, but how many? I didn't cross reference cases against net assets, but I'm sure the TCC has.

    4) All of this data provides a litigation map. My LC has a very solid asset base, but has 5 SoL "live" claims. 5 substantial awards and that's that. If I were them, I'd opt in and nestle in under that channeling injunction if at all possible. I also believe there are many more men that didn't come forward in my home state, some claims may have facts that tolled the SoL and it's not unthinkable that the legislature will reform the law.

    My nickel, for what it's worth.

×
×
  • Create New...