Chapter 11 announced - Part 14 - Plan Effective

[johnsch322]

4 hours ago, Patt_00 said:

I read through the Bar's Professional Code of Conduct and attorneys have an ethical obligation to communicate to their clients any critical/important information about their case, which also includes any changes to timelines for their claim/case. For 14 months, the Slater Firm intentionally withheld this from myself and the other 14,000+ of their clients. Its obvious Slater Firm  violated the code of conduct. I am currently drafting a complaint to both the New York and California Bar. I am also discharging the Slater  Firm.  I do have an attorney representing me on the matter of discharging the Slater Firm.. 

Would you please join Facebooks BOY SCOUT ABUSE and share this with the group.

 

[Patt_00]

8 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

Would you please join Facebooks BOY SCOUT ABUSE and share this with the group.

 

Just submitted my request to join the group.

[Patt_00]

In July of last year, @MYCVAStory shared some information from an attorney by the name of Lawrence Friedman. I'm reposting it.

To Survivors who have filed claims in the Boy Scouts bankruptcy case:

 

My name is Lawrence Friedman.  I am a former Director of the US Trustee Program.  Prior to my appointment to that position, I was a bankruptcy trustee in Detroit where I administered more than 10,000 bankruptcy cases under both Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code.  I discovered considerable fraud and abuse in the bankruptcy system, and I began writing and speaking about my findings, ultimately testifying multiple times before the US Senate Subcommittee on proposed reforms to the bankruptcy system.  My inside view led to my appointment as the Director of the Program responsible for the oversight of the bankruptcy system.  Within 90 days of my appointment, I was faced with the mega bankruptcies of Enron, WorldCom and Adelphia.  I immediately championed a change in policy which mandated the appointment of examiners in each of these cases.  Examiners bring transparency to the process, and examiners also act as a clearing house for information thus adding efficiencies to the administration of these cases. 

 

Since leaving the Department of Justice, I have been increasingly troubled by the use of the bankruptcy system to solve societal problems.  My focus is on these mass tort cases where victim Survivors are being victimized again by bad actor tort lawyers.  I believe that my team can bring these matters to the attention of the Court and effectively free up more than $70,000,000.00 in funds which these lawyers are claiming in fees and which rightfully should go to Survivors.  The explosion of claims within these cases is particularly troubling.  I have authored several editorials and white papers on this topic.  That said, real change comes from action.

 

I have been reviewing claims filed in the BSA case and I am appalled by the practices of some of the attorneys.  Many used claim aggregators to solicit clients and filed claims in these cases using the standard bankruptcy proof of claim form.  The claim form is available online and was designed to allow non-lawyers to fill it out.  The form doesn’t even have to be correct because if it’s not the debtor will object to the claim, and you get an opportunity to fix it.  Yet every law firm that solicited large numbers of claimants had the client sign a one-page retainer agreement that gives the lawyers a 40% contingency fee for doing nothing more than filing out this form.  The lawyers want to pretend this is a typical contingency fee case when in fact all they did was simply fill out a form.  Rather than collecting 40% of the money paid to victims, these lawyers should get a fee similar to petition preparers – non- lawyers who help people fill out forms to be filed in court – which would be more like $150.00.  There are other serious problems with these retainer agreements such as whether they comply with state laws and state bar ethics rules. 

 

Just as in the mega corporate cases, transparency in these mass tort cases is critical to fairness.  My firm wants to help Survivors get the attention and assistance they deserve.  Any compensation we receive would be a small fraction of the 40% they are being overcharged now!"

 

I am interested in chatting with any victim Survivors who have expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which their claim has been handled by their current counsel.  They can contact me with no obligation at: mailto:lfriedman@friedmanpartners.net

 

I've been in contact with Lawrence since @MYCVAStory posted this information. The Slater Firm debacle has give him what he needs to proceed with this action. If anyone is not happy with the way your firm handled your case feel free to contact him. He is taking clients regardless of the firm  you signed with. This would be a contingency fee agreement. He can represent you in order to get the fee agreement with your current attorney voided. This action is not going to delay the Settlement Trust from processing your claim in any way.

For anyone that is interested. Here is the original post by @MYCVAStory:

 

https://www.scouter.com/topic/33424-chapter-11-announced-part-14-plan-effective/?do=findComment&comment=554339

[yknot]

On 9/18/2025 at 3:10 PM, Patt_00 said:

The Attorney General's office asked me not to post on social media about the case until the trial was concluded which was earlier this year. My abuser was still involved with scouting in Massachusetts and the AG's office thought it was likely he was active on this forum.

That's a disturbing comment. While not pleasant to think about, it is certainly possible that some of the commentators on this forum over the years probably were involved in some of these cases. It's perhaps good to remember that a tactic of the guilty is to deflect blame elsewhere and weigh comments in that light. 

[Eagledad]

On 9/19/2025 at 7:37 PM, yknot said:

That's a disturbing comment. While not pleasant to think about, it is certainly possible that some of the commentators on this forum over the years probably were involved in some of these cases. It's perhaps good to remember that a tactic of the guilty is to deflect blame elsewhere and weigh comments in that light. 

Hard to tell; there were, and still are, BSA haters on the forum who were glad to push facts and unproven statements to make the BSA look bad.

Barry
 

[yknot]

9 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Hard to tell; there were, and still are, BSA haters on the forum who were glad to push facts and unproven statements to make the BSA look bad.

Barry
 

BSA "haters" would not be trying to deflect blame, though -- they would be doing the opposite. 

[johnsch322]

11 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Hard to tell; there were, and still are, BSA haters on the forum who were glad to push facts and unproven statements to make the BSA look bad.

Why would it have to be a BSA hater? Why couldn't a perpetrator be someone who may have been a long-time scouting member who may be defended the BSA or called what had happened a sign of times and touted that BSA did all the right things? Maybe now they regretted what they had done and expressed remorse by extolling how bad they feel for survivors. Saying a perpetrator would claim to be a victim is just trying to cast bad light on survivors. 

[Tron]

I think everyone is on this site. Haters, lovers, perps, survivors, various lawyers and spies for the firms, and everyone in between. Patt_00's lawyer telling him to stay off of here until the case is done was wise advice. 

[newyorkgiant]

On 9/9/2025 at 10:29 AM, clbkbx said:

Please read anything at all about how much the BSA paid to lawyers... it's reported regularly to the Court and it isn't as you describe. 

There is a lot of consternation about lawyers fees for some Survivors, especially in SOL states. Those are the loudest voices because they are rightfully upset. But you don't hear too often from those that are pleased with their representation. So: I am well supported and represented by the lawyers at Jeff Anderson & Associates. I'm thankful for their counsel. They will be paid a contingency fee as we agreed at the beginning.

I am new to this forum. I too am represented by Jeff Anderson & Assoc. I also agreed to a contingency fee. I am also thankful for their counsel. Would you be willing to share what your contingency fee is?

[Eagledad]

On 9/21/2025 at 10:14 PM, johnsch322 said:

Why would it have to be a BSA hater? Why couldn't a perpetrator be someone who may have been a long-time scouting member who may be defended the BSA or called what had happened a sign of times and touted that BSA did all the right things? Maybe now they regretted what they had done and expressed remorse by extolling how bad they feel for survivors. Saying a perpetrator would claim to be a victim is just trying to cast bad light on survivors. 

Many of us have been active and have developed reputations on this forum long before this discussion.

Barry

[johnsch322]

On 9/23/2025 at 9:07 AM, Eagledad said:

Many of us have been active and have developed reputations on this forum long before this discussion.

Many established reputations have been ruined over time when facts come to light. Not saying anyone here could be hiding something just denial of that possibility is a one-sided way of thought.

[Patt_00]

Myself and a number of Slater Slater & Schulman clients have discharged their firm as counsel. After I sent the discharge letter to the firm I was contacted by Johnathan Schulman. In our conversation, he stated the fee agreement with the firm is iron clad and none of the firms clients were going to be able to get their fee agreement reduced of voided. Johnathan informed me that I  would still be bound by the Slater Firm fee agreement and I if I retained another attorney, I would have to pay his firm and also the other attorneys fee out of my settlement. This is just a scare tactic.  Since the Slater firm debauchery, I have been in contact with an attorney that is will to help as well as researching this online. As it turns out, the fee agreement with the Slater Firm is not iron clad. . Here is information I found online which I think is very interesting. I just want to add that I'm not an attorney.

 

 

An attorney who fails to properly vet proofs of claims in a bankruptcy case can face severe consequences, including court sanctions, professional discipline, and civil liability for legal malpractice. A client may also have grounds to void their fee agreement and recover any damages suffered. 
Penalties for the attorney
Court sanctions

• Rule 9011 violations: Under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9011, an attorney who submits a document to the court (like a proof of claim) certifies that they have conducted a "reasonable inquiry" into the factual allegations. An attorney who fails to do so can face sanctions, which may include monetary fines, reprimands, or other non-monetary penalties.
• Approval of employment: Incompetent representation may lead to the bankruptcy court refusing to approve the attorney's employment or denying fees.
• Fee reduction or disgorgement: If a court finds an attorney's services were inadequate, it can reduce or order the disgorgement of fees already paid by the client.
• Disqualification: If an attorney signs a proof of claim, they risk becoming a witness in a dispute and could be disqualified from representing the client in that matter. 

Professional discipline

• State bar rules require attorneys to provide competent representation and act with diligence. An attorney who negligently handles a bankruptcy case can be reported to the state bar. Disciplinary actions can include:
• Suspension of their law license.
• Revocation of their law license (disbarment).
• Reprimands or censure. 

Civil liability for legal malpractice

• An attorney's failure to exercise reasonable care is a breach of the professional standard of care and can expose them to a legal malpractice lawsuit.
• The client must prove that "but for" the attorney's negligence, they would have had a better outcome in the bankruptcy case.
• In the context of unvetted claims, this could mean the client suffered damages from:
• Losing property that could have been protected.
• Having their debt discharge denied.
• Paying invalid or inflated claims. 

Grounds to void the fee agreement

A client may be able to void their fee agreement if the attorney's failure to vet claims rises to the level of negligence or a breach of professional ethics.

• Breach of contract: The client could argue that the attorney's failure to provide competent and diligent service constitutes a material breach of the fee agreement.
• Voidability under state law: Some state laws specifically allow for fee agreements to be voided for an attorney's failure to meet specific professional standards.
• Fee disputes: Even without a lawsuit, the client can challenge the attorney's fees through a fee dispute resolution process, arguing the fees are unreasonable due to the attorney's incompetence. 

Client recourse if harmed
If a client has been harmed by an attorney's failure to vet claims, they should:

• Seek a new attorney: Consult with new counsel experienced in legal malpractice to understand their options.
• File a lawsuit for legal malpractice: If damages can be proven, the client can file a civil suit to recover any losses.
• Report the attorney to the state bar: File a disciplinary complaint to have the attorney's conduct reviewed.
• Object to the fee agreement: Ask the bankruptcy court to void the fee agreement or disgorge the fees already paid due to the negligent representation. 

 

I was looking at the bankruptcy court docket and Slater Slater & Schulman hired 2 attorneys from the firm Robert & Robert PLLC out of New York. The names of the attorneys are Clifford Robert Esq and Michael Farina Esq. What I find interesting is these attorneys specialize in representing other law firms when they have client and fee disputes. The firm does represent law firms in a few other areas such as law firm breakups and partner terminations. However, client and fee disputes are the only thing that fits. They were admitted to the bankruptcy court when the Slater Firm-Settlemet Trust issue was first disclosed.

 

Edited September 27 by Patt_00

[skeptic]

Just reinforces the concept of how this, along with many similar type of cases takes advantage of people.  Another reason to completely overhaul our legal systems.  Or so it seems anyway.  

[johnsch322]

18 hours ago, skeptic said:

Just reinforces the concept of how this, along with many similar type of cases takes advantage of people.  Another reason to completely overhaul our legal systems.  Or so it seems anyway.  

When Bankruptcy becomes a business option to avoid full fiscal responsibility it opens doors for those who wish to take advantage of people. If Bankruptcy was not used as a survival method by the BSA the only cases that would have prevailed in state courts would have been legitimate and kept away the unscrupulous players. 

[fred8033]

On 9/28/2025 at 9:30 AM, johnsch322 said:

... to avoid full fiscal responsibility opens doors for those who wish to take advantage of people.

Yeah.  The fairness of the legal process in cases like this is questionable from many, many view points.