Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 4 Revised Plan


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

The Boy Scouts’ timeline to solicit and confirm a Chapter 11 reorganization plan must be pushed back to allow for depositions and comprehensive briefing on the nonprofit’s watershed deal filed last week, Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware said at a virtual hearing Wednesday.

I wonder what’s going on in tonight’s post-pushback huddle up. I’m sure all the sectors are scurrying. It has to be a double, “Oh, crap!” for the BSA and Ad Hoc Committee of LCs. Timeline adjustment, hearing on the discovery motions and then the not so subtle tongue-lashing they took from the COs counsel. Maybe Jessica Lauria shouldn’t miss hearings or status conferences. That young fella took a capital B beating today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@CynicalScouter Thanks from me and frankly, surely everyone, for tracking on the status of National's bankruptcy pleadings, and the procedural steps, past and pending, in the Bankruptcy case. And your

Okay. Enough. If you aren't talking about court proceedings then drop it.  It would be a shame to lock this thread now.

A few random observations from watching this bankruptcy unfold over the past several months: The focus has clearly been on protecting the national organization first and then the local councils.

Posted Images

40 minutes ago, yknot said:

Our state United Methodist Church Council issued a statement today saying all Methodist churches should not renew COAs but have the council charter units instead to limit liability. 

Not a shock. The Diocese of Dallas basically threw out all scouting units during the Fall 2020 recharter season as well.

That's why, by the way, the 2021 Charter agreements got a massive re-write last October/November to put specifically claims and insurance limits in writing. Several COs were, in effect, refusing to recharter unless it was spelled out what BSA was promising to do in terms of CO indemnity.

Compare, for example, the website in October/early November 2020

Site as of October 28, 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20201028172138/https://www.scouting.org/resources/forms/

Recharter form as of October 28, 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20201113235628if_/https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/membership/pdf/524-182_web.pdf

Compare that to what got slammed together at the last minute in November 2020. Note now the existence of the new Council-chartered unit form (Annual Council Unit Registration Agreement) as well as the Short Form Facility Use Agreement

and the new CO charter agreement with its new, very specific, insurance language

https://web.archive.org/web/20201127015750/http://www.scouting.org/resources/forms/

 

The Local Council agrees to: Provide primary general liability insurance to cover the Charter Organization, its board, officers, Charter Organization Representative (COR), employees, and adult volunteers for authorized Scouting activities. Indemnify the Charter Organization in accordance with the resolutions and policies of the National Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America. “The general liability policy issued to the Boy Scouts of America provides primary liability insurance coverage for all chartered organizations for liability arising out of their sponsorship of a traditional Scouting unit. Evanston Insurance Company provides the first $1 million per occurrence coverage. Additional policies, all providing primary coverageto the chartered organization, have been purchased so that more than $10 million in primary coverage is provided. There is no coverage for those who commitintentional or criminal acts. Liability insurance is purchased to provide financial protection in the event of accidents or injury that is neither expected nor intende

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a real dilemma for the United Methodist Church which has been an incredibly strong supporter of Scouting for a century. There is a desire to maintain a positive relationship with the Scouting  program that has served many local communities for decades.  A  national legal team has been working on these issues for months now in mediation with the BSA.  

The United Methodist Church operates through regional conferences which cover a specific geographic area such as a state or a portion of a large state. The conference legal team headed by a "chancellor' will issue an opinion or recommendation. Some conferences may choose to act now in giving a recommendation to local congregations and others may wait to see how this situation develops. It is clear that this relationship between the BSA and the UMC is strained, to say the least.  And as the Methodists go, many of the other denominations are likely to follow.

Church sponsorship of Scouting was essential in the beginning of the BSA movement to provide a public endorsement of the perceived values of the program. Yes, today local churches can opt to host a council chartered unit and simply provide housing. However, the message will be that the BSA has become radioactive.  

Next week is the 100th anniversary of the UMC - BSA formal relationship and a conference is being held at the Philmont Training Center.  It will be interesting to see if any updates will come out of that conference that can be shared publicly

And as one attendee said, it will be interesting to see if the mood at Philmont  is a celebration or a wake.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the for what it's worth category, I spoke to a long-time bankruptcy attorney today and asked "Was anything a surprise?"  His response, "Nope, the timeline was realistic without objection.  Objections are common and not a surprise"  He seemed nonplussed and suggested that bankruptcy court is a wonderful venue for grandstanding and lengthy proclamations if you are a corporate attorney, regardless of the validity of argument.  "Why?"  "Because the client is listening."   This grinds on but for all of us who hoped that our cases would see the light of day sometime it's still proceeding faster than they would have.  Small consolation I know.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DavidLeeLambert said:

 

So the only claimants it could help are those who were born on or after February 18th, 1980. The greatest peak of claims was roughly 1968 to 1974, and claims-per-year was consistently  decreasing throughout the '80s. There's the alternate clause "knew, or reasonably should have known", but since the LA Times published its "Inside the Boy Scouts' 'Perversion Files'" series in late 2012, that would be tough case to prove for any claimant who first filed in 2018 or later.
 

That's the way I read it from the start.  It sounded good for a minute though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, yknot said:

 Our state United Methodist Church Council issued a statement today saying all Methodist churches should not renew COAs but have the council charter units instead to limit liability. 

 

 

Do you mind sharing that statement or what State that is?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Maybe Jessica Lauria shouldn’t miss hearings or status conferences.

I'm going to give counsel the benefit of the doubt and assume major family or personal emergency.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, elitts said:

 

This is one of those areas where it's hard (for me at least) to know how to approach the issue.  Whenever I see someone making impassioned but incorrect statements I always have to argue with myself about correcting them.  I'm always trying to decide "does this person actually want correct information or do they just want a chance to express their feelings?".  On top of that, my second thought is usually, "regardless of whether or not the commenter wants/needs to be corrected, would leaving it alone result in other people getting incorrect information, and would that matter?"

So sometimes I respond, and sometimes I hold my tongue. (or fingers)  Frankly I think sometimes my decision depends on how argumentative I'm feeling in general.

In my case, I'm clearly still working through it.  I know that because sometimes what I post would make a pitiful legal argument.  I really don't suppose I'll ever really be past it.  It's just part of my past.  Not my fault.  Not even close to my fault.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

He seemed nonplussed and suggested that bankruptcy court is a wonderful venue for grandstanding and lengthy proclamations if you are a corporate attorney, regardless of the validity of argument.  "Why?"  "Because the client is listening." 

I’ve been in a good number of diverse contexts with attorneys (not including myself) and I’ve never, ever witnessed the degree of sycophantic, self-congratulatory pandering I’ve experienced on these hearings. I needed Saltines, tums and Ginger Ale to make it through. As I said before, I was proud to be under the TCC’s cover when John Lucas spoke. Class act, IMHO.

Edited by ThenNow
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muttsy said:

He’s probably licking his chops to tell the insurance companies that part of the story. He formed the Coalition and quit six weeks later. Why did he quit it and take himself out of the mediation? What did he see that turned him against the Coalition.

That is almost, verbatim, what Kosnoff just tweeted.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I'm going to give counsel the benefit of the doubt and assume major family or personal emergency.

I  said the same in my initial comment. Hoping for no true calamity or disaster. This was more about her presence vs. today’s. He wasn’t to blame, I was just making note in what was probably a less than sympathetic manner. Apologies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

He wasn’t to blame, I was just making note in what was probably a less than sympathetic manner.

I think BSA's counsel walked in thinking this was going to truly be just a status conference. It (degenerated?) into a on-the-merits sneak preview followed by counsel for three major current (Methodists, Catholic Dioceses) or former (LDS) CO groups twist the knife into BSA. They are not pleased. I know at least one Diocese threw out Scouting (Dallas) and the New Orleans diocese was on the verge and in fact told parishes NOT to but was talked down off the ledge.

BSA's back-up counsel did well in the sense of "did not screw anything up" and he did try to get the judge to schedule things faster (failed, but he did try).

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

In my case, I'm clearly still working through it.  I know that because sometimes what I post would make a pitiful legal argument.  I really don't suppose I'll ever really be past it.  It's just part of my past.  Not my fault.  Not even close to my fault.

I hope you stay strong.  You've already hit on the most important part of all of this, what happened WAS a part of your past.  This bankruptcy though has dragged it into the present for those who were ready for it as well as those who weren't.  I hope for all our sakes that at some point we can all find a way to put this back in the past where it belongs.  That's a tough destination to reach and the path is an individual one, sometimes interminably long with a lot of detours.  Just don't ever give up and you'll keep getting closer.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MYCVAStory said:

Do you mind sharing that statement or what State that is?

It is NJ. I can't seem to cut and paste the statement but it basically says what I posted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Muttsy said:

He’s probably licking his chops to tell the insurance companies that part of the story. He formed the Coalition and quit six weeks later. Why did he quit it and take himself out of the mediation? What did he see that turned him against the Coalition. Now we are beginning to see. 

 

8 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I can't wait for the next episode. Is it getting to the good part? Since the mediation parties agreed to pay the Coalition millions of cheddar for their critical role in reaching the deal, sans a hinted at objection by the TCC, do all said parties oppose "exposing" the Coalition? I know it will delay the process, but I will again admit and reiterate my feelings. These are not well thought out as to the impact at this stage, but they arose from about September 2020 through the bar date. I resented and also panicked watching the exponential rise in claims through a process that seemed painless to many claimants. It looked like there was no skin required to enter the game. No interview. No signature with penalties for fraud. No mulling and dredging out the past. I mean to cast no aspersion on any and all claimants that entered the case by whatever means if they 100% legit, regardless facial deficiencies in their claims. That happens. Memories fade. I just had a tremendously hard time seeing 100's and 1000's of attorney-signed POCs generated at mimeograph speed to get in under the deadline. It has always smelled of Danish fish. It may be wrong and currently counterproductive to voice this (again).

 

Ya know ... many of us ... at the request of other here ... have toned down our comments about the motivations of those diving these cases.  How much they charge.  Potential profits.  etc.  

But yes ... Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.  It ain't just the fish.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...