Jump to content

MYCVAStory

Members
  • Content Count

    178
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by MYCVAStory

  1. Yeah, that's clear. Does that make 1/3 or 2/3 of the attorneys representing a client are also Coalition members? How many of those clients replied to the Coalition's solicitation that the COALITION represents them and produced the coalition's 18,000 affirmative signatures?
  2. NO judge in a bankruptcy has ever forced a cramdown on victims. Now, if it gets to a point or two from 2/3 then perhaps but not much more than that. As well, sexual abuse bankruptcy decisions have seen 90% agreement as a standard from judges because they want that much agreement. The judge is realistic and won't have that high a standard but cramming down a decision when half a group disagrees would be unprecedented. That might also be the reason why she is so interested in how claims were generated and whether they should turn into votes.
  3. EVERY victim should be a proponent of a robust method of validating claims and weeding out any that were generated fraudulently or exaggerated. Yes, there are people in this world who go from one class action to the next, fill out a form, and take their chances. Check this: https://topclassactions.com/category/lawsuit-settlements/open-lawsuit-settlements/ But consider something else, lets make believe you have a large number of clients and then some other attorneys show up and through marketing put together their own large number or amass a larger number than yours. All of a sudden you
  4. I'm not so sure I would lump those three together. The TCC is FAR less motivated to settle for a fraction of what the Hartford owes.
  5. On this we agree and I think you've made the point regarding the difference between equity and equality and the problem with bankruptcy dealing with sexual abuse. Equality would mean that everyone gets the same settlement regardless of SOL for each "category" and other factors. Equity though is connected to the BUSINESS of bankruptcy and the reality that each claimant became a piece of data related to value prior to bankruptcy. Then, factor in that the pool of available funds is limited from the debtor and the insurers NUMBER ONE defense is that some claims are worth less because of the SOL
  6. Protect the BSA or make sure EVERY victim knows this is the time to file a claim?
  7. What about victims? What about all of those who will bankrupt their LCs or have NO path forward. What happens when those in line first exhaust the insurance?
  8. What's your problem? There was a Town Hall recently AND another one is advertised for 9/9. They are postponed when it makes more sense but check www.tccbsa.com for the next one.
  9. Your comments border on the disgusting. The BSA from the beginning wanted blanket immunity and it was the TCC that objected to that for LCs.
  10. Context is needed. The BSA called up Stang and several attorneys pre-bankruptcy to see if any agreement could be reached. He was paid esentially as a mediator and someone with the kind of experience to make realistic what the BSA would be facing. It went nowhere fast. If he were biased then he would ave pushed for a bad settlement. He did not. As well, I spoke to someone in the TCC. BEFORE he was retained he made clear his previous involvement and that it was as an adversary to the BSA and supporter of victims.
  11. Coming attraction for Monday should be a new face and voice taking on the insurers; Kirk Pasich the TCC's insurance coverage professional: https://pasichllp.com/attorney/kirk-pasich/ Insurers hate him. Google his name and check the news. Hopefully he'll get a word in edge-wise. This judge likes letting people go one and on and on and.....
  12. They shouldn't. They absolutely shouldn't. But, the debtor won't support the months and more it would take for complete validation. That's why work continues to remove duplicates and more importantly, figure out what attorney is representing each claimant. Sadly, this is why bankruptcy is the WORST mechanism for dealing with sexual abuse claims.
  13. Of course you would, and the TCC has said that it believes in a robust vetting system. But, this comes down to a judge and whether she is willing to do the right thing or the expeditious thing.
  14. Alas, the sheer volume and number prevents that. As well, I suspect there are attorneys who do NOT want their claims vetted. Why, because that increases the chance that their clients' claims will be denied. Look at it from the Coalition's standpoint. If you control a trust, if the judge isn't allowing your fees, if you can cut deals with insurers that will see their NOT objecting to those fees, then who cares where the money goes as long as you GET YOUR 40%. I hope I'm wrong but if there's word in the next week, on the heels of the RSA expiring and the judge slapping down their fee argume
  15. GOOD GOD....I got some time at work and said "Well, let's see what the forum is up to and....BAM. My takeaway: Gilwell, as you've discovered, this forum tries its hardest to deal in facts. As the Hollywood Producer Robert Evans said "There are three truths, yours, mine and THE truth, and all three are correct." I don't know what you heard or were told but the reality is that the BSA DID NOT EVER direct claimants to AIS or any other law firm. Period. Did AIS reach out to your scouts like it has others because you can buy lists of former scouts from data analytics companies and say the
  16. Yes. In part to make sure that claims are validated to make sure that there is no fraud or duplication involved. A settlement trust if created would do that as well as take on the fight with insurers via retained insurance litigation experts.
  17. Exactly. This is the awful part of bankruptcy being the process for dealing with abuse/injury. Victims see headlines like "Judge allows BSA settlement to move forward...." and they start checking their mailbox for checks. The reality os that the bankruptcy process is DEBTOR (BSA) initiated for DEBTOR benefit. They settle with their claimants and move on down the road. Claimants are left with a settlement of some portion of what's owed them or their litigation (in this case with insurers) continues. Even if there were a global settlement with all insurers, and that is HIGHLY unlikely at t
  18. I was told by a wide old Sage Bankruptcy Professional at the start of this "In mass tort bankruptcies 90% of the claimants have TWO questions ONLY. How much will I get and when will I get it?" Insurers know this. They live for it. Their outside attorneys are paid by the hour more in a couple weeks than I'll make all year and that's still a bargain for the insurers compared to settling. The longer insurers can get claimants to wait the less they'll take to get it over with and the money that sits in the insurers accounts makes more than expenses. . The shorter they can get claimants to se
  19. Yeah, that candid conversation is important but sometimes you have to watch what you say. Let's all remember this tidbit that was entered into the court record from Mr. Kosnoff, defender of victims when he mistakenly hit "reply all" to the wrong group. Best interest of ALL victims or one group? Yes but no more. We need to control our power. Not just to the committee but to everyone - mediators, BSA, councils etc. JH told you Stang told Pasich to shut down until Nov. You realize don’t you that WE did that. Anne and Jon aren’t handing over any of their data to anyone unless and unti
  20. C/O an advocate involved here are the "principle" attorneys representing TCC members and advocating for ALL victims, and not just the clients of any coalition. The bios give an idea of their experience on the victim experience side. I'm not a lawyer, I'm not shilling for any, and other than my college roommate who became an attorney and owes me beer money none have ever paid or owe me a dime to post this 🙂 https://www.paulmones.com/paul-mones/ https://mersonlaw.com/founder-jordan-merson/ https://www.hurley-law.com/attorneys/christopher-t-hurley/ https://www.crewjan
  21. Scary thought for the night....no judge has ever "crammed down" a sexual abuse bankruptcy settlement against the vote of claimants. That's good. Expect a 66% approval vote from VOTING claimants (not total number) for approval. Claimants aren't required to sign their ballots if their retention agreement with their attorney and claim form signify that their attorney can do so for them. So yes, that places a lot of power into the hands of mass tort attorneys who can be expected to vote for a LOT of clients. Think their clients will do so instead? Consider that when the Coalition asked its s
  22. Just as a reminder, because it is part of the bankruptcy "deal" all Council contributions will be a part of the disclosure. That said, that information like all others is open to objection. The TCC has maintained strongly that claimants have the right to know before they vote.
  23. Here's an interesting tidbit about sexual-abuse related bankruptcy. POST bankruptcy, insurance is very very...wait for it....EASY to get. Yep, that seems illogical but the reality is that there are companies that love that scenario because there are far fewer "unknowns" as in claimants waiting to come forward when SOLs change. That said, if the abuse starts again (insert your opinion here) then the companies will adjust premiums accordingly.
  24. I hope it's 12/1 but....I spoke to someone involved and was told late today, "Some time in Q1 of 2022, maybe even later in it" is a lot more realistic. The hand-to-hand combat and delays are still to come. This sucks for every victim but is a reminder to settle in and focus on the fact that we're closer to the end than the beginning of the bankruptcy. Then, a trust, and insurer fights for those insurers that don't settle pre-bankruptcy....that's possibly years. Sorry. Not news anyone wants to hear and I hope I'm way wrong but given the history of it and holiday slowdowns I don't think
×
×
  • Create New...