johnsch322

What I don't believe is that this is over. I do believe that there will be more SOL states. My optimism is for others I live in California and my abuse occurred in California. This is not over.

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.

Personally I feel lousy about it. Hopefully there can be some kind of righting of this wrong even if it means I would get less.

I personally don't feel all is doom and gloom. I found it interesting that the TCC said that the BSA was not happy no ones happy. That is usually a good sign of compromise. Also BSA was on the clock.

I cannot answer that with any certainty. My lawyer definitely did and I would assume so based on that fact.

The psychiatrist was associated with my lawyer and it was virtual. The interview was about the abuse, my life since, impacts on my life, and he spent time on present mental state.

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.

I looked up the Crater Lake Council web page and it says that location is temporarily closed.

So what kind of supporting documents would you be talking about? It seems that the majority of the claimants told no one about what happened and I have read that for male victims that is prevalent. So there would be no paper trail about the abuse. Most are old enough that if they had told there parents the parents are now deceased. Would the fact that the abusers name is in the perversion files be enough?

While browsing thru Zillow I noticed a house/meeting hall being sold by the local Boy Scouts in Eureka California.

One other question (for now) I was told by a lawyer that once BSA filed for bankruptcy I could not be cross examined. What do you know about this? Thank you for taking questions and answering.

If what you say is true and I have no reason to doubt you there will be many disappointed claimants. That sounds like low hanging fruit will be first maybe. Perhaps this will be where individual claimants lawyers (if they have one will be needed). 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 (my lawyer has mine). I would think this would be the harder part. I know that you have stated previously that if an insurance company doesn't pay what the trustee deems they must than the trustee can go to the court and have them held in contempt. My question for this would be that doesn't give the insurer their day in court can you clarify please?

My understanding is that the LC's that contribute (not sure if they all will) by a channeling mechanism. Insurance company's if they settled could essentially do the same as Hartford has tried (but TCC and others have said no). The insurance settlements (if they happen) post bankruptcy will be with the trust settlement trustee. Neither the LC's nor the insurance have to bankrupt to settle though some may as a result. I am not sure about state AG's suing (though they could bring charges). LC's that contribute I believe will not be subject to SOL lawsuits as they will be deemed to have settled with the victims. If others on the forum with more legal could help me out here I would appreciate it.

One of the messy parts I see for mapping/tracking is how resources will be deployed and to which cases. If claim "A" was given only cursory attention, very little resources from the trust but claim "B's" claim was given extreme attention and more resources put into it and they both were paid on an individual basis would that not open the trust/trustee to be liable for negligence? How would claim "A's" lawyer feel if this were to happen?

For what it is worth and I have put quite a bit of thought/worry/anxiety into this. My thoughts are there will be settlements from the insurance company's. Most likely they have all or most all of them have run case scenarios from best to worse on their exposures. Just like Hartford did they have come up with an amount they want to settle for, what there top amount they would agree or what they would say hell no come at us on a case by case basis. I am sure Hartford knew they were getting off lightly at 650Mil. and that is why they are upset. On the other side of the coin I am sure that the TCC has come up with how much they will be asking each insurance company for (with some refinements with more data) just like the did with the LC's contribution amounts. They have retained insurance specialists already. The total amount of cases will be whittled down (duplicates, outright fraud, etc. Remaining survivors will get assigned a dollar value according to the 2 matrix we have seen or something similar. I believe this is were either lawyers or individuals representing themselves may have to make a case in some situations for their claim. There may even be quick low dollar offer to shrink the pool of claimants further. Once the values are assigned and I believe that the money will be divided based on the assigned values. If the total value amount of the claims is XXX,XXX and only XXX is collected than a survivor will get 50% of his assigned value (less fees) This will most likely be in several payouts over time. It is hard for me to imagine a case by case situation or what insurer or even council charter org. since all of the fight against the insurers will be funded from the same pool of money. If the insurance company that is liable for my case settled for myself (and all others they covered) and legal cost for that recovery was XX but another insurance carrier settled for the same amount but cost of recovery was 4 times XX or more it would turn into a logistical nightmare. Of course this is just how I see the future but then I also have no magical ball.

I am not sure it was a TCC lawyer who said that but rather a member of the TCC. I just reread the FAQ that the TCC put together and it isn’t exactly clear why one would need a lawyer though I do have one. My understanding is that once the settlement trust is established that would be when a lawyer would be most helpful. I would like to hear some real expertise on this.

Sounds less like attacking survivors. I am sorry for being a bit personal. I wouldn't wish my misery on anyone and I feel for those who are innocent of the acts that were committed upon my body and soul. Conversely there is no amount of money that could actually compensate me or other survivors.

This feels like you are saying that survivors of abuse are extracting (possibly illegally) billions and shouldn't expect half of the take (common word for stolen money?). That you would need that much to to extract (steal) if some one raided a castle (stealing again?). And it really doesn't matter who you are (abuse survivors) or how tough life's been for you (being, raped as a child and having to live with that for your life). (deleted-personal attack)

I vote 55B

The TCC has been extremely quiet. Any idea about the next town hall?

The issue of debating about lawyers could be compared to 'What came first the chicken or the egg". I find from the above that you are speaking from both sides of a coin. You pretty much say it is good but it is bad and you are correct. Do I wish it was 10, 20, or 30 percent of course. First contract I signed was 40% and then when my lawyer assigned me to another law firm it became 33.3% plus expenses. It is a larger law firm handling many more of these cases and when I talked about it to my first lawyer he said he was happy for me (I am sure he will get his cut of the 33.3%). Could I have done this myself...well I could have filled out the POC beyond that no. Original intent was to file in a court and then of course the bankruptcy came along. Definitely could not have represented myself thru the court system. Does it feel wrong that my law firm will get 33.3%...no. When I consider that they have major amounts of overhead which includes many lawyers, support staff, rent, utilities etc. etc. well maybe you can see where I am going from here. But how much is really fair....I would have to say fair is what I agree to. How much is appropriate...well you might get what you pay for. What really isn't appropriate is how much the BSA has spent on lawyers fighting to keep from paying money to survivors.

I think we might see other states open up own investigations.

Obviously I cannot speak for everyone I can only tell my story. What I can say is that the claimants lawyers are in the business of practicing law. The imperative word in that last sentence being business. They all have expenses rent, utilities, support staff etc. etc. Most if not all of these lawyers took these cases on a contingency basis meaning if there is no recovery they get nothing and not all contingency cases are won. However I will say that if the minimal $9,000 is all that is recovered per claim than I am confident that all the firms with a large amount of cases will at least clear their expenses. Also from what I can garner not all claims will receive any money. Some will be denied. Secondly they all have a fiduciary obligation to maximize the amount recovered.

As I have stated in posts previously all of this has been like pulling a scab off of a wound. The first person I talked to was someone on the end of an 800# and it did not go well. She ended up saying they would send me a link to the perversion files. When I called back I left a message and no one got back to me and I am sure it was just an intake person whom I had talked to. I did a little research and found a lawyer who specialized in survivor cases and had started his career as a psychiatrist and transitioned into law. I left a message and he personally got back to me. he spent quite of bit of time talking to and listening to me. He explained the history of what was transpiring and made me feel extremely comfortable. He set up an appointment with a psychiatrist who could affirm for the courts that indeed I had the symptoms of past abuse. He followed up with me and offered to have professionals reach out to me to help with my feelings with no out of pocket costs. Unfortunately he came to an untimely death and it was with great sorrow i heard of his passing. Fortunately for me his son was part of practice. His son has the positive attributes of his father. I am able to text him at anytime with any of my concerns and worries and he always gets back to me. When this into bankruptcy my lawyer informed me that he was going to assign me to one of the larger firms (I think that they represent about 1600 claimants). He explained to me that I would be better served by the bankruptcy expertise that my current representation has and that with so many claimants they would have a seat at the main table. This firm called me multiple times and explained what was happening and each and every time it was a lawyer. We set up a time to talk to do the POC and spent about 2 hours going over it. She took her time asked questions had me expound upon what I said. She probed but she was empathetic and made me feel comfortable even between the tears. I opened up about something I had personally done after my own sexual abuse which I believe could be very important at some point of time. She is the only person I have ever told that to. This is probably more than you had asked for and may not even be helpful to you but believe me writing these words is helpful to me.

From what I understand once the settlement trust is established it will be our lawyers (for those of us that have one) that will be presenting our individual cases to establish valuations. Theoretically if $100,000 is on the table they can make a case for $200,000 (as an example) and thus earn their fees. My lawyer/lawyers help me prepare my claim and thru their questioning I am sure it is much stronger just because of that. I believe that is why the TCC is encouraging survivors to have legal representation.