Jump to content

Chapter 11 Announced - Part 6 - Plan 5.0/TCC Plan TBD


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Yikes!  At $500K per (or five years in the hoosegow, pokey, slammer, etc.) that could potentially bump up the victim fund.  But, I believe, since this is a federal court, monies from fines imposed only go to the US Treasury, and, so, only Congress could direct the disposition of those penalties to fund the fund.  Good luck with that!  Literally, an Act of Congress.

Don’t forget that it needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and something about the Feds is they only take cases they are almost certain to win.  You may see a few get caught if their stories are off and were signed by a lawyer but I think it’s more likely they’d go unpaid and uncharged.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is Doug Kennedy, a member of the TCC.  First, I want to thank all of you for your comments over the past 18 months.  Your comments and those in other forums, whether I disagree with them or not,

A few months ago, one of the posters here offered some great advice I thought.  Type what you intend  to say. Set it aside for a few minutes and look at it again before you press "post". Does it

Normally I wouldn't discuss user issues, but given his profile pic and signature I'm going to make an exception: Regardless of the impression given by his profile picture and signature line, Cyni

Posted Images

From Tim Kosnoffs Twitter 

EISENBERG ROTHWEILER harassing survivors who voted to Reject to change their votes. Judge needs to stop this.

There is an audio recording of a call from an Eisenberg attorney calling an AVA claimant in Oklahoma who voted to reject the plan trying to persuade him to change his vote.  I did not know how to copy the recording but it is shocking to hear.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, johnsch322 said:

From Tim Kosnoffs Twitter 

EISENBERG ROTHWEILER harassing survivors who voted to Reject to change their votes. Judge needs to stop this.

There is an audio recording of a call from an Eisenberg attorney calling an AVA claimant in Oklahoma who voted to reject the plan trying to persuade him to change his vote.  I did not know how to copy the recording but it is shocking to hear.

 

I just saw this as well.  I will say these lawyers also sound super unprofessional. People need to start firing their lawyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 100thEagleScout said:

I just saw this as well.  I will say these lawyers also sound super unprofessional. People need to start firing their lawyers.

If what Eisenberg and his firm is doing is unethical/illegal (not sure) I wonder if a claimant or group of claimants can sue his firm?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

And with that....voting deadline extended two weeks.  If you thought calls from an attorney were about to come to an end, you were wrong.  If you wanted time to get a ballot and change your vote, you've got it.

Did they push out all dates 2 weeks?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Did they push out all dates 2 weeks?  

Not exactly.  Voting report is 1/6, confirmation hearing still 1/24 start, various objection deadlines altered slightly.  BSA spoke about reserving the right to challenge reporting requests.  Sounds like they may not want to report out where the $3500 elections came from as applied to Council.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, oh. Don't look know, but E.R. just got their hinder lit on FIRE. Two clients who consented to TK presenting their communications from E.R. with the court, unsealed and unredacted, just went live and addressed the court. Wow. "The roof. The roof. The roof is on FIRE!!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

Oh, oh. Don't look know, but E.R. just got their hinder lit on FIRE. Two clients who consented to TK presenting their communications from E.R. with the court, unsealed and unredacted, just went live and addressed the court. Wow. "The roof. The roof. The roof is on FIRE!!"

Could you explain?  Is the judge upset?  Was this during the hearing or just the docket?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Could you explain?  Is the judge upset?  Was this during the hearing or just the docket?

The motion being heard is E.R.'s effort to seal TK's deposition, specifically the clients' emails/texts/etc. The clients appeared to emphatically confirm they made clear, knowing and informed waivers of the attorney/client privilege. They were adamant they want the communications illustrating the browbeating and serial Plan support communications from E.R. to be made public. Does that explain it? Judge's issue went to whether the waiver was "sufficiently informed as to potential downsides." The clients made it clear it was. I bet she denies the motion to seal. My non-litigator's guess. Ruling will be tomorrow at a TBD hearing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

First ... I'm shocked that the judge allowed the voting to push out but the objection dates to remain.  That doesn't seem right.  I remember she questioned the old dates as being a tight timeline between vote & confirmation ... this smells a bit fishy.

Second ... ER sounds like he is very concerned if this is released ... I wonder what he is hiding.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it.  This whole thing has been ripe for legal abuses from day one, especially with some of the major players.  Again, we need to overhaul the legal processes in this country, as far too often, the cases get hijacked by certain individuals who are not known for high integrity, including bringing in questionable claimees.  Justice is not well served if it has a constant dollar sign on it.l  JMHO of course.  And it does not just relate to this fiasco.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Second ... ER sounds like he is very concerned if this is released ... I wonder what he is hiding.  

E.R. Being the Eisenberg Rothweiler firm. (Anyone else notice that autocorrect changes Ken’s surname to Rottweiler? I just report the news, I don’t make it.)

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