Jump to content

ThenNow

Members
  • Content Count

    683
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by ThenNow

  1. As one of the guilty, I love this line of friendly jesting and mockery. Regardless the historic basis and reasons, our use of language can be absurd in its lack of clarity and accessibility. I believe that was the initial poke, as well as an admission of a lack of patience and understanding of legal gibberish. It was a poke at us and himself. Jolly good humor, I say. While working in legal affairs for an entertainment company, I got in trouble for redrafting a series of agreements to make them understandable to the artists forced to sign them. It was one of my proudest moments as an attor
  2. As you say further in your post, I agree that magnitude took the BSA by surprise. Other factors, too, but I won't reiterate what I've already said. For many on the victim/claimant side, it was less shocking and some publicly predicted an enormous number of claims. I can't quite imagine the shock and stunned silence in the BSA board room when the finally tally came in following the Bar Date. I have little knowledge of the BSA's decisions and decision-making processes prior to the Chapter 11 filing, but since it does seem like a fair measure of weak "game" and "clock management." To me,
  3. Indeed. Shame is an insidious and deadly malady for many. For others, it introduces us to all manner of additional psychological and physical harm and destruction.
  4. Not sure what this means. I didn’t file suit. Not ever. Not still. I filed a claim in a Chapter 11 as a prompt and polite RSVP to a gilded invitation. An invitation sprinkled with fairy dust and promises of “understanding, equitable compensation” and great “outrage” at my suffering. So, whatchu mean and what’s the relevance? No comment on the universal invitation to contemplate being among the victims, in person or through a child? No need. No one has so I have my answer. I don’t mean this as directed to you, necessarily.
  5. I occasionally relay small bits of these interchanges to my therapist. She is a specialist in child sexual abuse and, during her PhD, did her practicum treating convicted sex abusers. Her father was a prison chaplain and I find her a fascinating and incredibly good therapist and person. Anyway...she muses out loud about how those who think the victim/survivors and vampire attorneys are unjustly trying to victimize Scouts and Scouting would feel if they or their boys were among the 84,000. I know, I know. People say, "It wouldn't make any difference. I would still feel the same," but that is ut
  6. I know he has responded, but I will give my take. In addition to his engaged involvement as a Scouter and dad, I've read many of his posts on other threads. I didn't seek them out, they were just part of topical threads that interest me. (I have too much time on my hands.) Other than on the Grooming/Psychobabble thread, his demeanor is much different and his contributions clearly evince his love of and commitment to Scouting. I read he is frustrated to the point of personal dismay (he took time off to get his "head straight," I believe it was) and I believe longstanding frustration has morphed
  7. I have a little bank account among our others that's titled, "Misc. Stuff" in our online lineup of accounts. I made the mistake of letting the paper statement get into my wife's hands a few months ago. Thank you, Covid. She never got the mail before this. Some things should be sacred. Anyway, she looked at the list of smallish charges. Nothing big, some gun stuff, something for the cabin, something for one of my siblings, a book, some workout bands, and, etc. "What's this?" says she, holding up the few pages. "Why aren't WE using a card toward AmEx, American, Marriott, Hilton...points?"
  8. As I've watched the back and forth on this - and I do believe it is a hinky deal or they wouldn't be so coy - I was thinking about the broader context of a case like this. Companies that go into Chapter 11 because of mass tort liability, and not basic financial and economic stress 101, have a dual dilemma. They have to fend off and financially respond to the mounting tort liability AND they have to show their books. Books that may be wonky, but no one really knew about it because they were bumping along down the road in a relatively stable condition. Now, they are forced to undress the financi
  9. "The lady doth protest too much, me thinks."
  10. Read: "Yippee! Great for us. Great for BSA (though we don't really care about that.) We're getting out of this for a song and a prayer. Our butts are so far exposed on these ill-advised policies it's not even funny. Well, maybe it is. Jokes on you, BSA CSA victims..." "Prudent defenses" and "legal postures." Ha. Read: "Yes, we have coverage defenses, but we are by no means confident in the strength or weight of those defenses. This is a happy exit for Hartford!"
  11. Now that you mention it, this scenario brings to front of mind the effort my "drowning swimmer" put into taking me down with him during lifesaving.
  12. Yes and double for footnotes, triple for terms of art and quadruple for Latin.
  13. They do enjoy a friendly game of poke the bear, don't they? It is either a case of utter incompetence or a self-inflicted dissociative state. So, heck freezes over, Styx is impassable due to ice shoves, Cerberus rolls over and plays dead, and the TCC, FCR and Coalition suffer a simultaneous, protracted brain freeze. Got it. I'm going with D, "None of the Above," for the win. Ain't gonna happen. Boy howdy! That gets me 285.71 Limited Edition Starbuck's Salted Caramel Mochas, pre-tax. I'm so excited. Jk. I don't like caramel, mochas, Starbucks or being insulted to my face. (I di
  14. An unfortunate fraternity, but better than being alone.
  15. That's what I thought I recalled. All my years, tip to tail.
  16. Is anyone aware of the coverage years? The TCC has obviously pegged the number of relevant claims according to those years, as well as indicated there may be more since some claims omitted the year(s).
  17. I both stand corrected and beat to the punch, again!
  18. You keep saying that. Are you certain? Have you reviewed all 870 cases and the criminal statutes of limitations in each respective states? It’s the law, like it or not. You’re “kicking agains the goads,” as the Bible says. Too late now. I do think we did break off a discussion along these lines. Do you really want to be sued for real, and not just metaphorically or by implication based on your contributions, dues, time invested and, etc.? The cost of that will be much, much greater. Again, this hyperbole about concomitant “abuse” of the current and future Scouts/Scouters and being sued i
  19. We went there when it happened, so I pretty much agree, from the BSA’s perspective. From my perspective as a victim/survivor BSA CSA claimant, it revealed much and flipped the switch. For that, I’m perfectly content. Maybe it’s worth noting that when Ms. Lauria changed firms there was a vociferous objection to her and her partners continuing to represent the BSA, due to potential “confidential information” they had previously acquired in dealings with Century. As I’ve said before, and I’m certain she’s a top notch bk attorney, there has been a demeanor and approach I felt was incompatible
  20. Oversight. Negligent. Stewardship. Negligence. Entrusted into the care. Negligence. Implied duty of care. Negligence. Badge on the uniform says BSA (Trustworthy, loyal...). Affiliate, associate, agent, sanctioned and approved volunteer, employee...liable.
  21. PERSONAL OPINION: There are significant differences between the facts of the RCC cases that distinguish them from the BSA CSA liability scenario. I believe those differences are critical and place insurers in the direct line of fire to pay on the historic policies.
  22. I’d call it a litigation pivot. Different team for a different strategy, as well as a signal of the level of seriousness. Free agent acquisitions and substitutions mid-season recognizing you have a chance to win or lose the title based on key talent.
  23. I'm thinking incidental claims between $45 and $8000 will have little bearing on the substantive discussion, precedent (express or implied) or court's ruling on 84,000 individual abuse claims valued at not less than between $2,450,000 and $50,000. Just my guess.
  24. $102.716B+, but what's another $700,619,500 between friends?
×
×
  • Create New...