SiouxRanger

I don't like the weight of Nalgenes either, nor the wide mouth as it is too easy to spill too much if bumped over, however, some have noted that they are easier to work with in winter if water becomes frozen or slushy.

In the case of the time barred claims, they not only ripened, but expired. The purpose of bankruptcy is to discharge valid, enforceable debts. For individual debtors, virtually all their claims are known as of the date they file bankruptcy. These are claims known as of the date of filing. For corporate debtors, such as a manufacturer of trucks, there is a greater likelihood of claims arising in the future based on facts existing prior to the date of filing of the bankruptcy. I think these would be based on warranties extended, or a tort theory, like negligence or products liability.

I am not familiar with that case having come late to this forum, but it sounds like the court held that the statute of limitations was tolled for the period of concealment. This is a common doctrine, applicable in cases of those out of the country, in military service, minors, and where a cause of action is concealed. I doubt the court held that the the statute of limitations was no longer applicable. If you recall the citation, I'll check it out. So, consider the case of a scout abused in one state, whose council's office is in another, in 1955. Perhaps 3 potentially d

This is entirely accurate. It is an attorney's ethical responsibility to understand the legal aspects of a situation, the client's circumstances, and then advise the client regarding different courses of action, the consequences of those courses of action, and the range of typical results. Sometimes the attorney recommends a course of action as the one most likely to coincide with the client's known interests. And then let the client decide how they want to proceed. A client who directs an attorney to take a course of action that the attorney does not recommend, or which is signific

It is the compassionate thing to do, no doubt. It is the smart thing, in slight defense of National, as it can make the claim that it is trying to (equitably?) compensate victims by including a class with no legally enforceable claim in the settlement. But National does not need to be successful in this attempt, just make the attempt to claim that it tried. (As I've posted, National definitely seems to want those folks voting in favor of its Plan.) With respect to claimants "turning on one another," my read is that that is unavoidable. I find it highly unlikely that a Claimant

I agree that someone with a time barred claim should have no vote. And because they have no right to recovery and no path to have a right to recovery. The law does not tend to favor those who "sit on their rights." It is why we have statutes of limitation. Courts do not want to be in the business of adjudicating stale claims, where documentary proof has not been retained (discarded in reliance of the existence of a statute of limitations), witnesses are dead, can't be located, or their memories faded-because these factors tend to diminish the ability of the court to assure both sides a

I agree, but think the court "can't suddenly make it so." Not without authority in the bankruptcy code.

I absolutely agree. I cannot conjure up even a hint of a wisp of a legally sound argument to support a time barred claim recovering anything.

Generally, the first to volunteer for the job is the only one to volunteer, and the committee then generally acquiesces in the volunteer taking over the role of COR. We have a small troop; the active adults is 8 to 10, and most attend troop meetings, so we know each other over many years. The IH's participation or involvement with our Troop is minimal and largely limited to signing the charter application and that is about it. As Pack and Troop Committee Chairperson for about 20 years, I never had any substantive discussions with the IH.

That answers that. "Ancient" = "the memory of man runneth not to the contrary."

Both IH and COR, or just only one? I seem to recall obtaining the IH signature years ago, but not sure if the IH signature is still required.

In my unit, the COR has always been a volunteer. And so, with every signature on an adult application, perhaps the COR has signed on to liability if the adult abuses. And National knew this was a problem, created risk, and gave no warning? Trustworthy?

My adult involvement goes back to 1996± and I believe COR or IH signatures were required then and ever since-and were pro forma at that.

It is a question of finding one's backbone.

And there times when one must speak the Truth, to be true to one's core beliefs, or remain silent and die a little bit in spirit and soul-and forever regret one's weakness. One never stands taller when one shirks from one's beliefs.

I think we are essentially on the same page. What should be done, ought to be done, and would be done in a normal business organization, at least in my council, has not been done. My information is only anecdotal, in-depth knowledge of my council, and incidental information of other councils. And even from incidental information, it is beyond clear that other councils operate in a much more efficient manner than my council. I once asked the second in command in my council for some statistical information about a council-level program I was working on. The second in command pretty

Tell me about it. We are on our 5th SE in 20 years. Volunteers and staff report to me that the 3rd one was good. I left direct involvement at the official council level a couple of decades ago because it was clearly a pointless effort. I put all my energy into my unit and the scout camp. Now that I am back at the council working committee level, I am reminded of why I opted out long ago. Nothing has changed.

No one regrets more than me that I have more ill-formed questions, than half-baked answers.

And so, let's take this ON. First, I am not talking about audited financial statements. (You have made the legally objectional assumption of a "fact not in evidence.") I am talking about MANAGEMENT reports to its Executive Board provided by management; "stated" in accountancy parlance. And pumped out routinely from the council's accounting software. And if financial statements are given to Executive Board members, but are of no meaningful use to assist those Executive Board members in managing the financial aspects of the council, then please tell me why anyone bothers to provi

In all my reading and study of history, that which governments fear most is the citizenry taking to the streets. It is a simple question of math: Gandhi: Yes. In the end, you will walk out, because 100,000 Englishmen simply cannot control 350,000,000 Indians if those Indians refuse to cooperate. And that is what we intend to achieve: peaceful, nonviolent, non-cooperation -- till you, yourselves, see the wisdom of leaving. And so, now we have not only individual CO's, but large blocks of CO's "taking to the streets," figuratively, and refusing to stand in the line of compliance and a

Well, I can speak only for the shower houses and restrooms at my council camp and the separate show and restroom stalls are simply sterile-cinderblock walls to a ceiling. NO place to mount a camera, even concealed without being obvious to anyone looking for a concealed camera. That all being said, I do not know if my camp's shower houses and restrooms were built to National standards, or something else. So, perhaps my council camp's buildings are unique. But I agree, virtually every building is unique, wherever located.

As I keep reading bankruptcy posts, I keep thinking of the post about the attorney who was "spitting nickels." There are many aspects of this whole proceeding which are bizarre. (Failure to comply with discovery, failure to file complete Exhibits (National-many times), seeking Ten Million Dollars in attorneys fees never having produced a bill??? (And $950,000± a month thereafter??? For what?) A payment without substantiation to a group who controls the vote to approve National's Plan??? What would one call that??? And I truly agree, this is a long way from over. And the gr

(Gee-not a word about ban......ptcy here-ahhhhh.) I've owned Gore-Tex, coated nylon rain jackets, plastic cheepie rain jackets, and ponchos. I've camped extensively with the Troop in the midwest, winter at 10 below and hot summers, muggy, rain. Worked at the local scout camp a couple of summers, and on the Philmont staff 4 summers, 3 as a Ranger, and taken 4 Philmont Treks as an adult advisor. (over 40+ years). So, what I've learned and what I do: My Gore-Tex rain jacket and pants were very expensive and not serviceable as they did not breathe, leaked water, and were heavy

Well, I recall a previous post speaking of 53% of total assets and 73% of unrestricted assets, if I got that right. If that is not the case, but truly 15%, or paid from a year's passive income, well, certainly nearly painless. I doubt that the Bay Area Council is a typical council. On the other hand, based on information from a source considered reliable (by me), my council's contribution is at about 50% of unrestricted assets, and 32% of total assets-assuming National's financial statements for each council are accurate (which I don't necessarily accept). It seems that my council i

I can't see how anyone with half a clue could see this as painless. As I recall, National's standard was to report a 2% membership growth year-to-year. Recruiting new members was a DE's job responsibility. Now we have a 40%± drop in membership. Further, it seems the consensus that the LC's will spend about 50% or so of their total assets and even a higher percentage of their unrestricted assets. What company just sends off 50% of its assets and feels good about it? It would be fatal to most businesses. Precisely. And they won't. The non-disclosure agreements have