MYCVAStory

They said in the meeting last night that they had created an almost hour-long video explaining the review processes (three paths) in detail and hoped that the video would be up on the website very soon. At that length hopefully it answers a lot of questions or at least helps Survivors ask the right questions of counsel.

You have to wonder if after trying to control things for so long and excluding the TCC, then having that fail, if this wasn't a last(ish) effort at retaining some control over Trust operations. Sounded like the Judge wants no part of that.

Judge called a hearing on quick notice....NOT happy that the STAC couldn't agree on ONE Trustee. TCC and Pfau/Zalkin wanted Hauser. Coalition wanted Levy. Deadlocked at 4-3 and the BSA submitted Hauser's name to the Coalition's consternation. Coalition wanted two trustees with one being Levi. Judge decides that she will allow Hauser to move ahead because it is the BSA's plan. Buchbinder says two trustees would be a mess and she agrees. She also seems VERY pissed that the STAC couldn't work this out an dmade work for her, she wants a VERY independant and qualified Trustee, she will be looking at the role of the STAC and appears to want it to be advisory at best with an independant trustee. Interestingly, Rothweiler raised his hand to speak but she disallowed it because he is a represented party and Molton was already speaking for the Coaition. NOT a good look when you want to jump in to take your attorney's place. Pachulski gave Molton a biot of a lesson in Bankruptcy code so maybe this was damage control. Overall....a good result for Survivors if this judge wants the right Trustee, and the lawyers who have been fighting for two years to be advisory at best.

TCC Town Hall tonight. Letter from my attorney said it could be an interesting one worth watching. Please find below the Zoom Information for Tonight's Town Hall Meeting at 8PM. (Eastern Time): Zoom: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) Dial-In by Telephone: 888-788-0099 (Toll Free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295. If asked for a “Participant ID,” just press # Video recordings and transcripts of the town halls can also be found on the Tort Claimants' Committee's website : https://www.tccbsa.com if you are unable to attend tonight's meeting.

The takeaway is that this settlement gives the BSA 12 months to work out an acceptable protocol for release (redaction, privacy, etc) and the Trustee has the authority to file suit to compel the court to do so. Bottom line, a path has been laid out and the BSA with the new Youth Protection Committee can walk it and the Trustee will be waiting to see if they show up at the destination.

Reminder..... The TCC urges you to attend the TCC’s “Town Hall” meetings. The next “Town Hall” meeting will be February 17 at 5 p.m. (Pacific)/7 p.m. (Central)/8 p.m. (Eastern). The TCC will discuss its recommendations about these material changes to BSA’s Plan. Here is the Zoom link to the Town Hall meetings: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 OR telephone: 1-669-900-9128; Code: 82272826295#

An FYI.... The TCC urges you to attend the TCC’s “Town Hall” meetings. The next “Town Hall” meeting will be February 17 at 5 p.m. (Pacific)/7 p.m. (Central)/8 p.m. (Eastern). The TCC will discuss its recommendations about these material changes to BSA’s Plan. Here is the Zoom link to the Town Hall meetings: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 OR telephone: 1-669-900-9128; Code: 82272826295#

Vetting has only been done by attorneys filing claims. (Insert opinions about that here). That's why the selection of a Trustee, claims processing professionals, and a Trust Advisory Committee are so important. Ultimately the Trust will vet claims as best as possible so that available funds go to valid Survivors. While the scope of this is historically large its been done in other mass tort and abuse settings. So, there are "best practices" and if a Trust is established let's hope it communicates well its work.

From the TCCBSA.COM website: The TCC will be holding a Town Hall on Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 8 pm (Eastern) to discuss the latest developments in the BSA bankruptcy. Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

One opinion....closer to the end of the bankruptcy than the beginning since a confirmation hearing is rapidly approaching. But....if it all fails the clock resets to where all Survivors were the day before it was filed. If it succeeds then Survivors have to understand that a Trust needs to get up and running and claims are addressed "first in, first out" (FIFO) according to filing date. Even then, as non-settling insurers are litigated by the Trust that will take time. So, post any settlement this will take....more time. Some Survivors might get a look at all of that and say "Give me my $3500 so I can forget about all of this. And if some combination of the above happens, where third-parties can't be released, then Survivor litigation may commence for some. Oh, and ALL of it can be appealed by objectors. So, we're closer to the end of something....but not very close to the end of everything. We're all living the reasons why bankruptcy was never intended to adjudicate sexual abuse.

The RSA was essentially her saying "Okay, you can go down that path but it's YOUR job to prove that the destination is the right one." An RSA isn't an endorsement of a settlement. That said, getting to a confirmation hearing is huge and hopefully any decision won't get tied up in appeal. Sorry to raise that possibility!

The article is over four years old. While it hints at her feelings re third-party releases it's a hint at the bankruptcy landscape THEN. Recent decisions invalidating third-party releases and anticipated appeals moving higher and higher suggest that she would have reason for different feelings now. As well, she did say from teh bench that her Millenium decision should NOT be taken to apply to this case necessarily.

A confirmation hearing is a lengthy process in cases as complex as this one. Recent predictions are that it could take weeks and not days. Should a plan be confirmed it would be a resolution. If not it could still be a resolution if a plan fails, the BSA says "we tried" and injunctions against LCs are lifted. Still, even if a plan is confirmed there can be appeals and if a trust is set up it will take time for that operation to get going. Survivors should remain as patient as possible and not expect checks in the mail the week after the 22nd!

One has nothing to do with the other at this point. The BSA can proceed with a confirmation hearing regardless of voting outcome. Percentage of approval/rejection is one component of confirmation procedures and why it's expected to take weeks!

Let's remember that the Judge was VERY interested in knowing the numbers that elected the $3500. If you take those accepts/rejects out the total lowers even more to 70% accept and 30% reject. I have to suspect this is NOT what the BSA needed/wanted to demonstrate widespread support at a level that would make the judge remotely consider overwhelming creditor support for a plan that included third-party releases, partial insurance settlements and other issues. Two years and how much has been spent "voluntarily" by the BSA to solve its past sexual abuse problems? Keep in mind that beyond this disappointing vote and the fact that a judge has NEVER forced a cramdown in a sexual abuse-related bankruptcy there are significant hurdles now to releases for non-debtors, the DOJ waiting to make that clear in this case like it did in Purdue AND that a confirmation hearing is going to really dig into BSA and LC assets as well as the expert reports from Claro on Survivor claim value. NONE of this is good news for the BSA. If something's to be salvaged it's going to come from mediation at this point and the BSA and Coalition working WITH the TCC and Insurers to get a deal done. This vote didn't do it.

Well, I guess that tells us the results will be posted prior. Or, they're prepared to walk a fine line without divulging anything. Or, they'll just want to ignore them and spin whatever spin they want people to believe. Look for winks and coded language but beware anyone holding a gold pocket watch and slowly swinging it back and forth....back and forth.... Sorry, sometimes the sad absurdity of all of this is too much to ignore.

If I were Omni I'd prep the docket notice, turn off my phone, turn the lights off at the end of the day, walk back in the dark, hit "send" and then run to the door, lock up and keep running. There will be questions and I'd want to get a good night's sleep first!

Well....we'll know more soon. If the BSA hits the 75% needed its calculation was right and partnering with the Coalition was a smart move and they delivered the votes. If it's under 75% then it looks like they're teeing up an effort to go full Palm Beach County and start looking for hanging chads. But what if there's a more current analogy? What if it's like the most recent election and the discovery barrage on a ton of non-Coalition firms just further validates that these "smaller" firms counted and recorded their votes correctly after all? Be careful what you wish for. I'm a Survivor, and I don't do "looking back" very well. But I try to keep perspective and reflection from time to time that I can handle. Right now, I can't help but think about the millions that have been spent on legal fees by the BSA, money that could have gone to Survivors, done in a voluntary bankruptcy to achieve the goals of the BSA to wipe the slate clean and emerge. If the 75% is reached it's a step forward with SIGNIFICANT jurisdictional/release issues ahead care of Purdue but still a BIG step for the BSA to emerge. And if the 75% isn't reached? Well, I'd love to be a fly on the wall of that meeting with the BSA when it asks its bankruptcy attorneys "So tell us again how partnering with the Coalition, excluding the TCC, and having the US Trustee fight third-party releases is going to work out for us?" You can spin every scenario but some days you just have to think about who you'd rather be. Today it'll come down to one thing: 75%. Very little in bankruptcy is "game over" until the judge says so but for today the BSA's path is about to get easier or a lot harder and judgement about that strategy and how all that money has and will be spent for now hinges on that same thing: 75%.

This could be an interesting TCC Town Hall meeting: The next regular Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, January 6, 2022, 8 pm (Eastern). Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

Judge grants a month delay for the confirmation hearing. Hints that "other legal issues" need to be considered and will allow parties to request that they be addressed. In other words, she will consider the third-party release issue at the start of a full confirmation hearing. Voting deadline will NOT be changed. She'll address any Survivor who wants to change their vote, on an individual basis, but wants to see the vote total first. New date is February 22 for confirmation.

At which point everyone moved on like he had never spoken. A shame. At least he tried to remind participants that this was about Survivors.

To be a bit more specific because the non-denominational devil is always in the details: · This is an an agreement to try to raise $30 million from various Methodist entities. · Of that amount, $2.5 million will be used to pay defense costs when the Methodists are sued. · $2 million must be paid within 6 months after the plan effective date so long as the confirmation order was not stayed or appealed. · Methodists will have 3 years to raise the remaining $28 million. · Methodists will work with BSA to encourage other chartered orgs to collectively contribute another $100 million to the settlement trust. So....the largest existing chartered org is going to TRY and raise 27.5 million, less than 10% will be provided within 6 months, the remaining will take three years. The 100 million is a fundraising "campaign". What IS guaranteed are the UMC releases.

So, that's one vote FOR the plan. Here's another take, it's critical for this plan to be defeated or rejected NOW to allow the BSA to consider bankruptcy a failure and determine how best to stop the flow of money on this endeavor; money that is NOT going to survivors. You can't "build" a plan in a way that does not conform to existing laws when your intent is to do the opposite.

This is a bankruptcy tactic. Send something out for vote, promise that the settlement will only get better, and if you don't like what has happened in the interim, (the deals made make things worse or better) you use that as justification for the settlement having changed. Yes, at some point the deal does change enough but the announced Century deal sounded like it had been expected. What hasn't been expected is the DOJ fighting so hard to reverse the Sackler decision, and winning. No way the DOJ doesn't fight third-party releases with the BSA bankruptcy. So, consider that domino effect....the Judge acknowledges that the third cicuit doesn't bind her but she agrees with the DOJ stance and does NOT provide non-debtor third-party releases. Then, LCs have said that they won't contribute to the settlement unless their charter orgs are protected. What do they do then? Cut off their nose to spite their face and yank themselves out of the deal allowing the BSA national to go it alone, or national acknowledges this and does the same? Or, do the LCs stay and say "Sorry" to the charter orgs? Does the judge ignore all of it and eventually rules allowing the releases and let it get dealt with on appeal? She's aware of this hurtling toward this 800-pound gorilla. Tomorrow will deal with the delay but everyone will be looking to see if there are any tea leaves to be read on whether she believes she has jurisdiction over the releases.

It's all used and entered if/when there's a confirmation hearing.