Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by ThenNow

  1. 5 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    Lower the peak for some, increase the baseline for others. 

    Want to see a bevy of apoplectic claimant attorneys who represent a pile of open staters? Do that. I can picture the conference room when that is proposed. Boy howdy. Yee haw. Sign me up for the midnight showing of that film.

    • Upvote 1
  2. 2 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

    But compensating for therapy and direct expenses should be a given.

    I did finally get a response from the BSA counseling reimbursement division, people, administrator or whatever. They said it is, "all subject to negotiation and settlement terms, at this time." I've not been able to confirm that with anyone on the claimants side, however. I know some non-claimants here think it wrong to get "money" in settlement and get "free" go forward counseling, but I don't think they contemplated the 58,000+ closed state abuse survivors' potential fate. Well, I hope they didn't. 

  3. 13 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

    Oops! I meant to comment on the Plus-Size person of the opposite of male gender having not yet exercised her vocal cords.

    Agreed. However, I am now in step-up therapy driven by the case. In my case, that means a tailored IOP. My treatment has elevated to twice per week with my primary (abuse and trauma) therapist and one day a week with her staff "intercessional" therapist. The latter basically makes sure I don't fall apart after two weekly sessions of trauma work. There's a point at which it is crushing not to have resolved. Twiddling while legislatures make sausage may be a bit too much for many. 

  4. 12 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I don't want to be overly optimistic but it is never over until the fat lady sings and she hasn't started to warm up yet.  

    I also think it important for those who may have significant disappointment in the future to being tempering hope with a pragmatic, left brain takeover. 

  5. 13 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

    they also said consistent with maintaining scouting. There was never a scenario where BSA was going to be able to come up with billions of dollars here because it did not have billions of dollars to offer in the first place.

    I've said this before and wish it could be heard by the broader public. I believe many of you here have and acknowledge it, to one degree or another. Other than the guys who were geared up and ready to litigate in open states, I don't think many of us sat down and did an available assets analysis and distribution calculus when we read the invite to file a claim. It is a simple matter of fact to say, "there was never going to be a scenario...", but facts and feelings are in play. More so feelings I think. In the minds and hearts of many BSA CSA survivors, we heard a promise. In it was a nod, at long last, and a committment to provide "equitable" payment. It drew us out into the open. Now, here some of us stand, basically naked with our hands out. Oops. "Please, sir. May I have some more?" "Um. Sorry. No equitable compensation for you." I don't think most men ran a decision tree analysis or insurance defense scenarios when they felt a spark of hope for recompense and affirmation of their pain. Yes, maybe it was all there to see and black and white, but it's hard to read through buckets of tears. It may just be me...

    • Upvote 1
  6. 10 hours ago, RobertCalifornia said:

    SOL victims are going to get the short end of the stick with insurance  settlements.

    If memory serves (big if), this means about 50,000 men are about to get b-slapped. This is not a proverbial poke, but a legitimate musing. How do open state guys feel about those in closed states being left with an Oliver Twist look on their faces? I’m sure a good many of the 50,000 have similar or more egregious abuse stories and will get precious little. Meanwhile, just over the boarder, someone with a “minor to moderately severe” claim will get a notable sum. Does that feel at all troubling? 

  7. 3 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    I believe an affidavit. It was about a 1.5 hour session with the psychologist not sure if he was following a form.  It didn't fee like he was.  

    Gotcha. Thanks. Without disclosing your details, of course, what was the nature of the interview and who selected the psychiatrist? Was it in person of virtual? 

    • Upvote 1
  8. On 6/29/2021 at 12:28 PM, johnsch322 said:

    Here in California to file a lawsuit if over a certain age you need a psychiatrist to evaluate you and render an opinion if he believes it was true

    I assume there is a form or required structure to that opinion. Is it an affidavit? Where might I find the form or requirements for the substance of the psychiatrist’s opinion? I’d love to review it. Thanks very much.

  9. 13 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

    provided, however,the Settlement Trustee will weigh the strength of any relevant evidence submitted by the Abuse Claimant to determine whether the statute of limitations could be tolled under applicable law based on a Protected Party’s conduct, and may apply a higher Scaling Factor if such evidence demonstrates to the Settlement Trustee that tolling would be appropriate under applicable state law; 

    If the statute was tolled, it is a live claim and it should be in the “open state” bucket. This is some Great and Powerful Oz legal fudging. A fight over tolling, based on fraudulent concealment for example, is no small matter to determine without a full hearing. 

  10. 1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

    if the objector produces “evidence which, if believed, would refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim’s legal sufficiency. . .

    So, what the heck qualifies as “evidence” and “if believed” by whom? The Trustee? Is the assumption that it means a defect like they abuser wasn’t in the Unit, there’s no such camp in Arkansas, you weren’t in Scouting in 1981 and just joined in 1983, we have a guy from your unit who says X didn’t happen, because I was there...? All of the above? The first are relatively doable for a claimant. The last, not so much. Do those terms need to be written into the Settlement Trust provisions? 

  11. 4 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

      If you filed a claim against BSA as part of the bankruptcy and it comes time for the trustee to decide how much the insurance companies will pay, the insurance companies MAY let me repeat this MAY demand testimony and cross-examination of the claimant.

    Per the Trust provisions in the last iteration, here are the basics, from memory. I’m at a wee cabin. This is what I recall:

    1) All claimants must complete and sign a new form (TBD) under oath;

    2) They can examine any claimant under oath;

    3) They can require any “addition documentation.”I say “any” because I believe it was open ended and not defined or narrowed; and

    4) They may call and examine other witnesses, including medical providers and psych counselors. 

  12. 1 hour ago, SilverPalm said:

    If survivors are satisfied with the transaction, viewing it as payment for services rendered, who am I to argue?

    Yes. The debate about the equity and morality of contingent fees is for another day and thread, perhaps. Frankly, it’s one I want to have as well. I personally agree it has gotten out of control in society and the legal community. My personal opinion. Also, as I’ve said, I believe the high percentages in a bankruptcy case don’t seem justifiable. The workload and expenses simply don’t run parallel with bringing a full-fledged civil case. Again, this my view and I’d love to talk more about it and tort reform. I appreciate hearing everyone’s view, so long as it doesn’t devolve into attacks.

    For most claimants in this case it’s simply the price of admission. Want VIP passes to see the Stones? The ticket price is X? Go on safari? Pony up Y. Want to submit a claim in this Chapter 11 if you have no sense of what to do or where to go and/or want the firepower? Sign on the dotted line and agree to the contingent fee of 33%++. If it’s an eyes wide open engagement agreement, it’s perfectly fine and acceptable. The macro discussion is another matter.

    • Thanks 1
  13. On 6/23/2021 at 1:27 PM, Muttsy said:

    Some are involved in other mass tort cases where they ended up taking 75% of the pot as compensation to the trustee and his lawyers. 

    I don't think was posted yet. Per the Amended Plan and Disclosure Statement, Pages 173-4:

    13. Settlement Trust Expenses The Settlement Trust shall pay all Settlement Trust Expenses from the Settlement Trust Assets. The Settlement Trust shall bear sole responsibility with respect to the payment of the Settlement Trust Expenses. Additionally, the Settlement Trust shall promptly pay all reasonable and documented Settlement Trust Expenses incurred by any Protected Party for any and all liabilities, costs or expenses as a result of taking action on behalf of or at the direction of the Settlement Trust.

    16. Compensation of Settlement Trustee and Retention of Professionals The Settlement Trustee shall be entitled to compensation as provided for in the Settlement Trust Agreement. The Settlement Trustee may retain and reasonably compensate, without Bankruptcy Court approval, counsel and other professionals as reasonably necessary to assist in their duties as Settlement Trustee, subject to the terms of the Settlement Trust Agreement. All fees and expenses incurred in connection with the foregoing shall be payable from the Settlement Trust as provided for in the Settlement Trust Agreement.

  14. Many, many pages ago when I was talking about how the boys in our Troop felt about our SM, I said something to the effect that we utterly revered him. A couple folks who replied outright mocked me. I am doing more research for my case and pulled this from a 2018 BSA CSA case. (https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Boy-Scouts-ORDER.pdf.)

    Take a peek if you're curious, especially those who ridiculed my characterization of our esteem for him and why it further complicated my response to the abuse, failure to report and overall confusion. I find this pretty powerful stuff and descriptive of how he was elevated to us and by the organization. Can't wait to use this before the Trustee. (Slightly edited to avoid annoying citations and footnotes.)



  15. 1 hour ago, Bronco1821 said:

    But my question is will Chartered Organizations only be responsible for cases where they were involved or will they put money into the pot for everyone?

    I’m sure it has to be an exposure/risk calculus just like the LCs. Cases that implicate them, closed/open state, how many live/recent claims not time-barred, and, etc. Terribly complex to figure out. When I looked through the CO list and saw all the duplicate or similar names. Lots to sift through and arrange and label in neat little stacks. 

  16. 3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

    I very, very much get the impression that some people in this forum simply wouldn't be happy with any outcome that involves BSA, the LCs, and/or the COs paying one dime and that any costs over that 10 cent piece is "unreasonable" or "unfair".

    Want to really blow some minds? Calculate the interest on an award for a 50 year old injury. I know it’s not paid, but...big numbers.

  17. 17 hours ago, ThenNow said:

    Back to my preponderance and discovery musings. How does the typical Great and Powerful Oz adjudicate such a thing as our multitudinous diverse and complex cases? What methods of discovery, examination…subpoena powers, etc.? Those other cases had pretty clear claimant “creditors.” Not so much in this quagmire. 

    Let’s settle down, class. Don’t everyone raise their hand at one time. No talking over each other. I don’t want to say any names...help? Also, while I’m peeing into the wind, does the Man Behind the Curtain have a goal of helping us maximize our award or slap us down as much as possible? 

  18. 6 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

    My lawyer/lawyers help me prepare my claim and thru their questioning I am sure it is much stronger just because of that. 

    This unabashedly and unashamedly self-serving (may help other pro se claimants), but how so? Not asking for details, of course, but in what areas did they help you flesh out your POC? I can imagine and it has caused me some anxiety, but not yet enough to terminate my relationship with current counsel. ;) 

  19. 9 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

    Again for me, the lawyers getting a large percentage ( I hope it's not the 40% someone posted, but even 35% which I am told is the average is too high IMHO) is also upsetting. I would rather 85-90% of the fund go the victims instead of 65-60%

    It is and some higher, I hear tell. Problem being, no attorneys? No cases. No cases? No Chapter 11. No Chapter 11? No Settlement Trust. “You can’t have one. You can’t have one. You can’t have one without the o-ther.” (I want all who sang along to raise their hand in shared humiliation.)

    • Upvote 2
  20. 10 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

    BSA will be allowed to live on but mine and possibly 100's of thousands of lives were destroyed by BSA policies of cover up and hide.

    Honestly, I think this is the most misunderstood, overlooked and perhaps ignored part of this (and any CSA) case. We were abused, which is a catastrophic psychological and sometimes physical trauma. Use significant brain trauma as an analogy of severity. As with some traumatic brain injuries, the soul/psyche and the relationships and impacts they have on the body never fully heal. In the Proof of Claim, we were asked to list impacts. It listed prompts of the ways our lives may have been damaged as a result of the abuse. We were asked to list medications, therapists, treatments, social problems, sexual problems, legal trouble, career problems, addiction issues, and, etc. For me, this was the longest section. The abuse was the abuse. Terrible. Awful. Dark. Evil. Yes. Ok. Ok. We all get it. BUT, understanding what the last 50 years has been like is the part I think some who play the “You guys are abusing the current and future Scouts, and are trying to destroy Scouting” walk right by on your way to the lawyer and victim bashing party.

    BSA will emerge with a self-imposed limp. We entered with a limp, if we were VERY lucky. Psychologically, some of us used crutches and wheelchairs. Some came in on gurneys, pushed by family members and noble attorneys. Some are long buried, not all gone by natural causes. Others ran to the gates, God bless ‘em. Today’s “King for a Day” decree would be that all the “haters” (or any who would be brave and empathetic enough to do it) would be visited by the Ghost of BSA Abuse Past. You would glimpse, not experience, the trauma and walk with one of us through the decades that have followed. I truly don’t think most people understand the loss of “our lives” this has been for us. Some things you take for granted, we were denied. I can barely look at some photos of my boys at certain ages because I see their young, innocence faces and I know I failed them in that moment. I attached pages of medical and treatment bills to my POC and it was daunting and heartbreaking to see them. I read every one. Treatment reports. Intake questionnaires. Diagnoses and program reports. Ugh. My wife endured so much. I see and reported the business losses. While I was in the psych hospital and then a national treatment center’s “Professionals In Crisis” program, one business went south. My big career opportunity of a lifetime, down the crapper. I have scars on my body inflicted by yours truly. Outward signs or inner torment. I spent a lifetime battling addiction, a classic maladaptive coping strategy. I wish you could understand. BSA will emerge to pursue its mission.. We may get some money. There will be no emergence. No great corporate sigh of relief. No monkey off our back. No live to fight another day. This is not and never was about healing or vengeance for that matter. Both are in God’s hands. This is recompense to child victims and BSA offered it. BSA offered it because it happened on their watch and, effectively, by their hand. 

    • Thanks 2
    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...