MYCVAStory Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, johnsch322 said: The case has been filed in Texas Federal Court, Houser vs the Non-Settling Carriers. I believe there are 82 carriers involved. Newly Retired U.S. Judge Lynn Will Mediate Huge Boy Scouts Insurance Dispute - The Texas Lawbook it's going to take YEARS. This is a time value of money proposition for the insurers. Delay is in their interest because they make money on the assets they hold. Assigning a mediator sounds nice but they'll never mediate an agreement that would be painful for the insurers and good news for Survivors. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 7 minutes ago, BadChannel70 said: This is the most recent order from the Texas judge. Combined with today's SCOTUS denial, I do believe the pressure is building on these insurance carriers. I'd like to agree but I think this is just standard briefing. The insurers will assert their rights and say that their policies allowed the investigation of every claim, something the Trust did instead, but doesn't bind an insurer. It would be a VERY bold step for a Judge to tell the insurers to pay up, and if they did it would be appealed in minutes. Again, the Trustee has 250 IRO claims she can send to trial and start to inflict pain on the insurers. Awards beyond the IRO amount then go to the "general fund" to serve all claimants. But, repeated losses (Juries tend to side with Survivors), would give the insurers real reason to cut deals. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 The trust has issued a statement. Why the Trustee hasn't used all this time to determine the next payout percentage is a head-scratcher. Perhaps a "town hall" will be called soon. Statement here: Salesforce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swilliams Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 10 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said: I'd like to agree but I think this is just standard briefing. The insurers will assert their rights and say that their policies allowed the investigation of every claim, something the Trust did instead, but doesn't bind an insurer. It would be a VERY bold step for a Judge to tell the insurers to pay up, and if they did it would be appealed in minutes. Again, the Trustee has 250 IRO claims she can send to trial and start to inflict pain on the insurers. Awards beyond the IRO amount then go to the "general fund" to serve all claimants. But, repeated losses (Juries tend to side with Survivors), would give the insurers real reason to cut deals. Do you have any guesses as to why she hasn't done this? Is there any benefit at all? It doesn't sound like there is, from what you've posted here, so I wonder what the reasoning is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 18 minutes ago, swilliams said: Do you have any guesses as to why she hasn't done this? Is there any benefit at all? It doesn't sound like there is, from what you've posted here, so I wonder what the reasoning is. No idea but it's the question I'd ask if there's another Town Hall. I hope others will as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clbkbx Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 6 hours ago, MYCVAStory said: the Trustee has 250 IRO claims she can send to trial Is there anyone other than the Trustee that would know how many of these cases meet the criteria to send to trial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 18 hours ago, clbkbx said: Is there anyone other than the Trustee that would know how many of these cases meet the criteria to send to trial? That appears to be subjective on the part of the Trustee. My hunch, and it's only that, that cases where there was ample notice (abuser was known to the BSA prior) and the covering insurance company has a lot of primary liability for coverage, would be ripe for release. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted 1 hour ago Author Share Posted 1 hour ago Insurer's first attempt at getting the Trust's suit against them tossed has been denied: USCOURTS-txnd-3_23-cv-01592-0.pdf Essentially, the insurers started playing their delay game and asked for the lawsuit to be moved to Illinois. The court has said "nice try, but no." So, it's a victory. BUT, expect there to be an apeal of this and any decisions unfavorable to the non-settling insurers. They are masters at delay and even with a trial moving forward it will be years until any resolution. This is a time value of money exercise and insurance attorneys are masters at delaying procedures so their employers hold onto their assets as long as possible. Still, let's appreciate any victory no matter how small, and hope some insurance CEOs start thinking "Okay, the cost of litigating this is starting to cost more than settling." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now