ThenNow

I sued Aetna and won a class action settlement for wrongful denial of specific claims. What is the cause of action here? What have they wrongfully refused to pay or denied? Where’s the there there? Is this subsequent to insurers saying, “Go suck eggs! I ain’t paying that!” once the Trustee makes value calculations and subsequent payment demands?

I bought a new BMW. Salesman talked real good. Transmission fell out 15 years later. (Actually, 10, but I had to stick with the schtick.)

Just trying to understand this part, while I’m waiting to understand the whole legal logistics of who’s on first and who’s on second. So, some handpicked claims will be released from the injunction to enter state court and pursue jury awards. If that ultimately provides the fulcrum leveraging recover for all other claimants, that’s fantastic. How do the test cases get selected? It would seem that any “test plaintiff” take home award should be capped to the $2.7 limit of a tier one claim. Anything above that should go to the Trust. No? Otherwise, the leverage plaintiffs could get awards of 3-5++ x the max Claims Matrix Value and that doesn’t seem right. Meesa cornfussled.

I don’t get it either. If the BSA and LCs are released, who’s the defendant? If the insurance company, they can’t be sued for non-payment of a non-liquidated claim against an insured that can’t be sued because they’re “immune” from a suit based on the underlying cause of action, which is now a non-cause of action, literally. Wouldn’t it be necessary for these test/leverage cases to occur before the channeling injunction gets set in concrete? I’m lost...

Updated: https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Boys-Scout-bankruptcy-plans-angers-some-welcomed-16290807.php And: https://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,4534,7-359-92297_47203-563119--m_2011_2,00.html

Is there an example of this type of document from any other case? I’m eager to see what might be out there to gauge how exhaustive this thing might be. Thanks.

I want to see “mine,” too.

I’ve been advised that claimants will have the same discovery rights and powers as a plaintiff. Can anyone confirm or deny? Also related to the Trust Claim Submission(s), in what order will claims be assessed or will this be a team of people (committee) charged with wrangling various batches/buckets of claims to move them down the conveyor belt toward the actual Trustee? If by some order, is that first in first reviewed? Still trying to get my head around the sheer logistics and process of this monstrosity. I suppose there is real possibility of a good number of guys taking an Expedited trip to the bank, making things somewhat more manageable. I shake my head reading that last bit. It’s not going to be “manageable” any way you cut it.

As MYCVAStory said well, this crew is far more engaged (hyper-engaged?) than the average claimant. I often wonder what those out yonder are thinking and being told. For me, I’m on to the insurance phase. I don’t think this is getting “bigger and better,” certainly not anytime soon, if ever. Will a “burn it down” endgame serve most claimants in state court? No way. Just consider the 58,000 closed or shades of Gray staters. I’m not saying I no longer care about the LC and BSA piece, I have simply resigned myself to “this is what it is.” As I’ve said repeatedly, I know and trust key players on the TCC and they have done a thankless, yeoman's job on this. If more was to be gotten under the time and competing interests constraints, they would not support the deal. I know others are far less trusting, but I cannot afford to wallow or cast aspersions when I really do not know what, precisely, is going on within the cone of silence. I’m trying to hold the moment loosely, see what comes of the bluster and meanwhile sharpen my knives and pull out my old flint knapping kit to reinforce the stock in my quiver.

Is this available for free viewing?

Yes. Good of you to make that critical distinction. I don’t want to create the wrong impression for anyone. Those cases that have tried to apply a global, “BSA has IVF and failed to disclose and protect all of these plaintiffs,” have not been successful, as far as I know. I’m sure you’re aware of these. Am I correct?

As I’ve said, I disagree. There is a clear path if one knocks out of the park a tolling argument based on fraudulent concealment or other. Yes, I know it is a difficult and exacting proof, but I will make a very serious, studied and tenacious run at it. I don’t intend to fail.

Precisely. “Don’t want to be sifted like wheat? I’m showing you the money. It ain’t much, but this is it or come to papa and stand before the judgement seat.”

So much for submit a claim, be anonymous and get a check. I guess those ads were a bit misleading after all? The documentation burden alone is going to be nearly insurmountable for some claimants. What amounts to in one’s “possession”? This is a huge fulcrum to flip people into the Expedited track. I’m ready, but I don’t know how many others are or will be. Zowie.

So, a CSA claimant who suffered abuse in a Gray 1, Gray 2 and Gray 3 state has a potential multiplier of 1.4. Sweet. I’m in the money. Put me in a new tier above Open, please.

Perhaps not to the BSA. It matters greatly to me and us. Anywho, I’m heating up the frying pan for the bigger fish flopping around in the bottom of my canoe.

I’m just babbling as I wait for the breaking news at 11. My anxiety is showing. Pay me no mind for the next few... That detail doesn’t make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

What? Say it ain’t so. This is purely the BSA’s man and not someone agreed to by the other parties? That don’t sound so good. Someone got some splainin’ to do.

That was an attempt at a little levity which may be needed to leaven the lump, as the Book says.

I don’t know about this fella. His CV and educational background are a tad light on substance. Or not.

Yes, thanks. But, I want to see MY policies.

Two questions for the wizards in our midst. The eventual Plan and Disclosure Statement will attach the “comprehensive” list of insurance policies. Does anyone know if they will provide any segmentation data for the applicable fields (CO, LC, additional insured, co-insured, years of coverage...)? And, will we plebes have access to those policies or will they be hidden behind The Great and Powerful’s curtain, shrouded in smoke and guarded by a blustering hologram?

Got it.

Still don't get this fudge factor. "Higher Scaling Factor" than 1% or the applicable Upscaling Claim Value (factors), as they're called? Specifically, Consideration of Aggravating Factors, Abuser Profile and Impact of the Abuse. If a valid case for tolling is accepted by the Trustee and s/he does NOT kick the claim into open state status, that would be mind boggling and contrary to law.

Currently, the only defense with traction that I can find is tolling of the SoL based on fraudulent concealment. From my lawyer's brain perspective, the whole thing is fascinating. It's a longstanding theory that is being successfully applied to the BSA CSA cases. A "counseling reimbursement trust" is what was mentioned to me.