MYCVAStory

Let's remember that the Judge was VERY interested in knowing the numbers that elected the $3500. If you take those accepts/rejects out the total lowers even more to 70% accept and 30% reject. I have to suspect this is NOT what the BSA needed/wanted to demonstrate widespread support at a level that would make the judge remotely consider overwhelming creditor support for a plan that included third-party releases, partial insurance settlements and other issues. Two years and how much has been spent "voluntarily" by the BSA to solve its past sexual abuse problems? Keep in mind that beyond this disappointing vote and the fact that a judge has NEVER forced a cramdown in a sexual abuse-related bankruptcy there are significant hurdles now to releases for non-debtors, the DOJ waiting to make that clear in this case like it did in Purdue AND that a confirmation hearing is going to really dig into BSA and LC assets as well as the expert reports from Claro on Survivor claim value. NONE of this is good news for the BSA. If something's to be salvaged it's going to come from mediation at this point and the BSA and Coalition working WITH the TCC and Insurers to get a deal done. This vote didn't do it.

Well, I guess that tells us the results will be posted prior. Or, they're prepared to walk a fine line without divulging anything. Or, they'll just want to ignore them and spin whatever spin they want people to believe. Look for winks and coded language but beware anyone holding a gold pocket watch and slowly swinging it back and forth....back and forth.... Sorry, sometimes the sad absurdity of all of this is too much to ignore.

If I were Omni I'd prep the docket notice, turn off my phone, turn the lights off at the end of the day, walk back in the dark, hit "send" and then run to the door, lock up and keep running. There will be questions and I'd want to get a good night's sleep first!

Well....we'll know more soon. If the BSA hits the 75% needed its calculation was right and partnering with the Coalition was a smart move and they delivered the votes. If it's under 75% then it looks like they're teeing up an effort to go full Palm Beach County and start looking for hanging chads. But what if there's a more current analogy? What if it's like the most recent election and the discovery barrage on a ton of non-Coalition firms just further validates that these "smaller" firms counted and recorded their votes correctly after all? Be careful what you wish for. I'm a Survivor, and I don't do "looking back" very well. But I try to keep perspective and reflection from time to time that I can handle. Right now, I can't help but think about the millions that have been spent on legal fees by the BSA, money that could have gone to Survivors, done in a voluntary bankruptcy to achieve the goals of the BSA to wipe the slate clean and emerge. If the 75% is reached it's a step forward with SIGNIFICANT jurisdictional/release issues ahead care of Purdue but still a BIG step for the BSA to emerge. And if the 75% isn't reached? Well, I'd love to be a fly on the wall of that meeting with the BSA when it asks its bankruptcy attorneys "So tell us again how partnering with the Coalition, excluding the TCC, and having the US Trustee fight third-party releases is going to work out for us?" You can spin every scenario but some days you just have to think about who you'd rather be. Today it'll come down to one thing: 75%. Very little in bankruptcy is "game over" until the judge says so but for today the BSA's path is about to get easier or a lot harder and judgement about that strategy and how all that money has and will be spent for now hinges on that same thing: 75%.

This could be an interesting TCC Town Hall meeting: The next regular Town Hall of the Official Committee of Tort Claimants' (the “TCC”) in the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy cases will be held on Thursday, January 6, 2022, 8 pm (Eastern). Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

Judge grants a month delay for the confirmation hearing. Hints that "other legal issues" need to be considered and will allow parties to request that they be addressed. In other words, she will consider the third-party release issue at the start of a full confirmation hearing. Voting deadline will NOT be changed. She'll address any Survivor who wants to change their vote, on an individual basis, but wants to see the vote total first. New date is February 22 for confirmation.

At which point everyone moved on like he had never spoken. A shame. At least he tried to remind participants that this was about Survivors.

To be a bit more specific because the non-denominational devil is always in the details: · This is an an agreement to try to raise $30 million from various Methodist entities. · Of that amount, $2.5 million will be used to pay defense costs when the Methodists are sued. · $2 million must be paid within 6 months after the plan effective date so long as the confirmation order was not stayed or appealed. · Methodists will have 3 years to raise the remaining $28 million. · Methodists will work with BSA to encourage other chartered orgs to collectively contribute another $100 million to the settlement trust. So....the largest existing chartered org is going to TRY and raise 27.5 million, less than 10% will be provided within 6 months, the remaining will take three years. The 100 million is a fundraising "campaign". What IS guaranteed are the UMC releases.

So, that's one vote FOR the plan. Here's another take, it's critical for this plan to be defeated or rejected NOW to allow the BSA to consider bankruptcy a failure and determine how best to stop the flow of money on this endeavor; money that is NOT going to survivors. You can't "build" a plan in a way that does not conform to existing laws when your intent is to do the opposite.

This is a bankruptcy tactic. Send something out for vote, promise that the settlement will only get better, and if you don't like what has happened in the interim, (the deals made make things worse or better) you use that as justification for the settlement having changed. Yes, at some point the deal does change enough but the announced Century deal sounded like it had been expected. What hasn't been expected is the DOJ fighting so hard to reverse the Sackler decision, and winning. No way the DOJ doesn't fight third-party releases with the BSA bankruptcy. So, consider that domino effect....the Judge acknowledges that the third cicuit doesn't bind her but she agrees with the DOJ stance and does NOT provide non-debtor third-party releases. Then, LCs have said that they won't contribute to the settlement unless their charter orgs are protected. What do they do then? Cut off their nose to spite their face and yank themselves out of the deal allowing the BSA national to go it alone, or national acknowledges this and does the same? Or, do the LCs stay and say "Sorry" to the charter orgs? Does the judge ignore all of it and eventually rules allowing the releases and let it get dealt with on appeal? She's aware of this hurtling toward this 800-pound gorilla. Tomorrow will deal with the delay but everyone will be looking to see if there are any tea leaves to be read on whether she believes she has jurisdiction over the releases.

It's all used and entered if/when there's a confirmation hearing.

We're about to hit "Expert Season" where every party hires experts to make their points or rebut those of others. The TCC back in September moved to hire Claro, a firm with expertise in assessing value of such claims. It was approved in October. It'll be interesting to see that report as well as others when they all start to see the light. From the docket https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/7deb7908-df9b-497d-9bf7-0fe922e7707a_6287.pdf

For many, the current settlement isn't much better. Many just might want a fresh swing at going to their Stetehouses with new ammunition to change their statutes.

Could be. I think I remember the TCC saying that their calculations also included the LCs being able to maintain their credit rating. Perhaps they'll discuss more of this tonight at the TCC.

TCC having a Town Hall Thursday night. From its website: A Town Hall will be held on Thursday, December 16 to discuss this week's developments, including the newly announced settlement agreements. Be sure you know how to fill in your ballot if voting individually. Watch our video "How to Complete & Return Your Ballot" and read more about how to be sure your vote is counted. View Most Recent Notice Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) or by phone: 888-788-0099 (toll free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295

That makes a fuller understanding of LC available assets even more important. Awaiting what the TCC can share and hopefully soon. Amazing how the LCs said they had pledged all they could....and now here's another 40 million. Is that supposed to buy the protection for all chartered organizations?

True. THAT is why the insurers are so critical and the Hartford deal such a sin. The USAG Nasser settlement is largely being paid for by insurers. For perspective, average settlement is approximately $760 Thousand. BSA average settlement, not so much....

Some important context on this insurance contribution from an attorney opposing the plan: Like the proposed Hartford deal, this is an absolute windfall for Century and for the third parties who would likely get a release of liability for paying $0 out of their own pockets or from their separate insurers. Century insured the most claims in this bankruptcy -- about 40,000 claims. With this settlement, the two insurers who wrote the most coverage, Hartford and Century, have now settled out. If you do the math, this works out to an average of about $20,000 per survivor who had a claim covered by Century, and less than an average of $10,000 per survivor if spread across all survivors who filed a claim in the bankruptcy. This means the global settlement fund will now be around $2.4 billion. If you look at the disclosure statement, the TCC provided estimated how much the average survivor would receive based on a global fund of around $1.6 billion. For ease of math, you can increase those estimates by about 50%. If you were fondled under the clothes, you are estimated to get an average of between about $1,200 and $22,000. If you were masturbated, you are estimated to get an average of between about $2,400 and $44,000. If you suffered the worst type of abuse possible, you are estimated to get an average of between about $5,000 and $87,000. As noted above, the fine print of these proposed insurance deals is that survivors have to release their claims against any of the insureds of these participating insurers. We have not yet seen all the fine print on this new proposal, but our guess is that it will require most claims against most charter orgs to be released for $0. If you have a claim against a wealthy charter, the Hartford and Century deals likely means that claim is released for $0 from that charter.

The members of the TCC made it clear that PSZJ, its lead attorneys, offered to pay 10% of its fees to a Survivor's Trust. This offer was AFTER it was retained and NOT part of the decision. PSZJ is the TCC's bankruptcy professionals and per bankruptcy rules paid by the debtor (BSA). That system is in place in all bankrutcies so that the impaired classes (Survivors in this case) have advocacy/representation. So yes, the BSA is paying its opponents attorneys in this case. NO part of the PSZJ fees is contingent upon awards. The Coalition's professionals have written their fees into the settlement agreement. No percentage was offered to the Survivor's Trust. The judge previously has made it clear she is not rubber-stamping those fees. Lastly, the TCC has said that it has a sub-committee of its Survivors that review all of its bills before voting to approve them. Bad week for the Coalition continues. Judge just ruled that it can be deposed. Insurers lining up to do just that.

Thanks....sometimes it's tough to digest every piece of some of the realities. Gotta go onto Amazon and order my copy of "Late Career Change to Bankruptcy Attorney for Dummies."

Worth remembering, the TCC's lead firm agreed AFTER being retained to give back 10% of its fees to a Survivor's trust. It's something, and not matched by the professionals from any other group. I know, I too wish I had a different career choice at this point but still....

One piece of news from the TCC Town Hall is that the Local Council "Dashboards" were submitted with the expert reports and are expected to be posted on the TCC website by Tuesday.

Given the current sensitivity around mediation I suspect all parties will be VERY careful about what is said between groups "privately." The Judge booted a mediator this past week. I wouldn't want to be in her sights for breaking mediation confidentiality!

FWIW....TCC Town Hall tonight. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the Tort Claimants’ Committee will hold a virtual town hall meeting on December 9, 2021 at 8:00 p.m. (Eastern Time). Zoom: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/82272826295 (no registration required) Dial-In by Telephone: 888-788-0099 (Toll Free), Webinar ID: 822 7282 6295. If asked for a “Participant ID,” just press # PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that, pursuant to section 1102(b)(3) and 1103(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, the TCC holds virtual town hall meetings for Survivors of childhood sexual abuse and their representatives Survivors who are not appointed to the Tort Claimants’ Committee to provide updates and access to information about the bankruptcy cases. The identity of participants shall be kept strictly confidential, but if you ask questions using the Zoom “Q&A” function, you might want to use your initials or otherwise abbreviate your name because the questions and any answers may be publicly visible or subject to discovery in the Debtors’ bankruptcy case. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that this Town Hall will include: Topics Extension of Voting Deadline Communications with the TCC and its Counsel, Mediation Update, TCC’s continued goals of (1) more money for the trust, (2) independent governance of the settlement trust, and (3) meaningful youth protection.

Objections to the plan and supplement are not due until the new year. She knew they were coming. This makes the TCC's unintentional email mistake seem minor compared to an intentionally agreed upon deal between the BSA and Coalition to try and install Carey as special reviewer (sort of a trust mediator and not Trustee). The judge is going to hear a LOT more about mediation now. Remember, the BSA and Coalition have been saying its been ongoing, intensive, valuable, productive etc. The TCC has complained that its been excluded at times and non-settling insurers have said the same. So now we have a judge that looked at the BSA's actions, in light of their contention about the value of mediation, and has said that at least one of the two remaining mediators was not impartial to the standard that the bankruptcy code required. As well, she also brought up the possibility of eliminating the mediation altogether. Why didn't she? Well, there's one mediator remaining and his specialty is insurance mediation. So, the BSA must now push that its plan was created "in good faith" when one of the mediators was working in concert with them to have a paid role in the Trust after confirmation? That isn't good faith and the Judge knows it. The BSA and Coalition have a VERY big problem now and we're still 48 days away from a confirmation hearing with objectror's expert reports and more objections still to come.