MYCVAStory

Some will be happy to take the $3500 and move on. That decision should be respected and unfortunately it might be $3500 more than they had a path to seeing before this. Should it be more. Of course. But in relation to number two, every victim and party to this should demand that only validated claims receive awards. The TCC has made it clear that a dollar given to a bogus claim is a dollar that can't be shared among those that are real. That deserves review. How that's done will be the work of the Trustee. Victims should at least take some solace knowing that there are professionals that specialize in this. Because primarily of the Catholic Church bankruptcy there are procedures for validating individual claims. The Trust should be spelling this out. Will it mean more work and more wounds opened? Unfortunately yes. But, it isn't realistic to expect a check in the mail simply by filling out a form. This IS also one of those areas where some victims, maybe many, will say My attorney earned their money" when they are tasked with submitting documentation. Do I want to deal with all of this and relive what happened? Of course not. But I accept that I owe it to every other victim to provide appropriate documentation to share in whatever money is available. For some that will be easy. For others VERY hard for a lot of reasons. But, until we have a lie detector that's fool-proof there's little alternative.

Because if you have thousands of clients and they receive relatively small amounts each it adds up and becomes a large amount for you. Welcome to the world of Mass Tort Attorneys. Asbestos yesterday, BSA abuse today, Something else tomorrow. All those infomercials urging victims to come forward work. I hope that the thousands of clients who now have thousands of questions about their individual cases are now getting their calls and email returned. The TCC's professionals represents that class and not individuals. As they commented last night they will produce an FAQ soon but if a victim has an individual question they need to ask their individual attorney, For some, given the number of clients, that might be difficult.

They are protected because they agreed to contribute. Essentially they have "bought" their permanent injunction. Some attorneys have said they will object to this and the US Trustee will weigh in but at the end of teh day Bankruptcy Judges lean toward being able to say "If the vast majority of the parties agree this is a good idea who am I to disagree?" Then, the judge can kick it to a higher court if that's where anyone wants to go. The insurers are already eyeing that.

This is an important issue to understand. If the agreement essentially said Anyone who wants to opt out can do so" it would produce an Oklahoma-style land rush on cases. The effect of that would be to eliminate insurance proceeds from all but the cases that make it to judgement. Essentially, the available proceeds will run out and leave victims with NO coverage. The trust will now determine which cases are "slam dunks" and allow them to proceed. THAT will place pressure on insurers. They WILL come to the table to stop the bleeding. As well, the trust will more than likely negotiate with those cases so that they will provide a percentage of any award back to the trust. That's a win-win.

That's for criminal prosecution. Civil isn't the same. Here's a great tracker from the Childusa site: https://childusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021-SOL-Tracker.pdf

All docs to be linked via TCCBSA.COM for those who don't want to deal with the Omni site.

Yes, this has been the stated goal of the TCC since the beginning. Going forward, transparency for the public AND publication of those who are a danger to the community. Plus 100 mil promissory note.

I have a hunch you're going to hear in the Town Hall meeting tonight how the TCC has addressed its YP concerns for change moving forward.

I disagree. What they said, and it showed, was that they have been working hard on this, had hoped to say more, but because of mediation confidentiality had to wait a bit more before getting into details. Failed mediation would have meant no agreement was near. That wasn't the message. At this point all parties have to wait for the BSA's filings. The TCC said it hope that would be today but asked for patience.

Yes. It basically means the parties are saying "We agree with this in principal and with the critical items. Now we'll work on getting it ready for a vote." It does NOT mean that it's a done deal however. Parties including insurers can still object.

Apparently the TCCBSA website mixed up the day/date for the next Town Hall. It's been corrected and is Wednesday this month: NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Wednesday, June 30, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/88993247600 (no registration required) or Join by phone: 888-788-0099, meeting id 889 9324 7600 To be discussed: Status of Boy Scouts disclosure statement Status of negotiations with the Boy Scouts, local councils, chartered organizations, and insurers Other motions pending before the bankruptcy court The plan confirmation process

I'm the wrong guy to ask for predictions. I'm still waiting for my stock in Betamax, Enron, and Delorean Auto to come back.

The TCC has stated that this is a highly personal decision based upon many factors. In States where victims may pursue cases against their abuser because the Statute allows it it's critical to have a case filed before any deadline AND an attorney specializing in abuse cases. As well, if this goes to a trust to be sorted out for some the complexity may necessitate having legal expertise. Again, it depends on the individual AND trust distribution plan. I'll reserve comment on what is an "appropriate" fee or percentage to pay and only say that ALL financial agreements between clients and attorneys are negotiable. What's "standard" is only so as long as it's accepted. The most important point to all of this is that the TCC's attorneys/professionals and Coalition's counterparts represent those entities and NOT individual claimants. Individual claimants MUST retain an attorney if they so choose for their individual situations.

FYI...Town Hall: NOTICE OF VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETINGS HOSTED BY THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF BOY SCOUT ABUSE SURVIVORS The next TCC Town Hall will be held on Thursday, June 30, 2021, at 5pm PDT/8pm EDT. Zoom link: https://pszjlaw.zoom.us/j/88993247600 (no registration required) or Join by phone: 888-788-0099, meeting id 889 9324 7600 To be discussed: Status of Boy Scouts disclosure statement Status of negotiations with the Boy Scouts, local councils, chartered organizations, and insurers Other motions pending before the bankruptcy court The plan confirmation process

Vegas odds say the next one will be Wednesday 6/30. Stand by.

Well, here's more than you probably want to know below. I'd guess that the attorneys representing a majority of claimants and have been involved with mediation would say that they are making a substantial contribution by getting to a settlement that the majority would vote for. Please don't make me explain the thinking of attorneys beyond that! It IS something that is objected to but the cost of the objection could add the fees if the objection didn't prevail. At any rate, here's the code in part from: https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2012/06/construing-substantial-contribution-under-section-503b3d Administrative-Expense Priority for Making a "Substantial Contribution" Section 503(b)(3)(D) of the Bankruptcy Code grants administrative-expense priority for the "actual, necessary expenses" incurred by a creditor, among other entities, in making a "substantial contribution" in a case under chapter 11. In addition, section 503(b)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code grants administrative-expense priority for "reasonable compensation for professional services rendered by an attorney . . . of an entity whose expense is allowable under" section 503(b)(3)(D) and "reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses incurred by such attorney." As explained by the AmFin court, these provisions are an "accommodation between the two objectives of encouraging meaningful creditor participation in the reorganization process and keeping administrative expenses and fees at a minimum to maximize the estate for creditors." The Bankruptcy Code neither defines "substantial contribution" nor sets forth criteria to be used in determining whether a substantial contribution has been made in a chapter 11 case. The issue, therefore, of whether a creditor has made a "substantial contribution" is a question of fact, with the moving party bearing the burden of proof. Most courts narrowly construe what constitutes a "substantial contribution" in a chapter 11 case, and most have taken the position that substantial-contribution claims, like other section 503(b) claims, should be strictly limited. The principal test is that there must be actual and demonstrable benefit to the estate and creditors.

In bankruptcy proceedings it is not uncommon for recognized mediation parties to "bargain in" certain fees as a part of a settlement. The code actually allows for reimbursement of fees if substantial contribution to achieving a settlement by a party can be demonstrated in the eyes of the court. If all parties agree then the court will usually allow it. Ahhhh....the business of bankruptcy.... I think saying the BSA "bought" votes is over-reaching however and would require not only the TCC and Federal Bankruptcy Trustee to look the other way but all other parties who would have to agree to not file an objection. The BSA couldn't deliver that. If you have a young son/daughter interested in law school have a conversation with them that starts like this..."You know, I've heard bankruptcy attorneys get paid pretty well at a certain level...."

An excellent question. Here's my guess. This is about to become ALL about the insurance and I wouldn't place my money on the Hartford "deal" (or better said Insult to Victims) even lasting too much longer. So, how then to get the insurance companies to settle? Well, that's where the trust comes in. There are cases that are "slam dunks." Horrible acts of abuse, States with viable SOLs, complaints about the abuser that weren't pursued, you get the idea. If the Trust allows them to go forward and the insurers start to get judgements against them they have to pay. If they pay enough then it becomes more advantageous to settle. EVERYTHING in insurance is Time Value of Money. Does this mean that every victim will be able to tell the trust "no thanks" and go pursue their own cases? No. The Trust is responsible for managing this process and against which insurers so that some will quickly realize it isn't worth it. Does it also mean that those cases that go out to apply pressure will wipe out the available insurance proceeds for everyone else? No, the Trust would more than likely negotiate terms ahead of time. Will this take time? Yep. The insurers will put up defenses and even try to settle before making a more "global" offer. At some point though the dam breaks for them and they want out. Welcome to the business of bankruptcy. It takes time. I'm sure the TCC knows that victims want to know what's coming next. Waiting to see if it announces a Town Hall meeting this week at TCCBSA.COM

Exactly. Full Stop.

Your points are excellent and feelings understandable. The very sad fact of this whole situation is that the BSA has put all victims into a bankruptcy process and not a justice process. This has been about business and not justice and for many that hurts the most. One thing to consider is that the TCC has mentioned that as part of this there will be "non-monetery issues" to address after the dollar amounts have been settled upon. The TCC has specifically said that as a part of the BSA restructuring it is focused upon the IV Files so that abusers are known and not able to be a part of other youth-serving organizations, and changes to the BSA Youth Protection program. Given tat the TCC is made up of nine victims I'd be surprised if they have forgotten about these issues.

Just a comment or two, the BSA plan is a "placeholder" that it needed to file to stay in synch with the court docket and make progress toward bankruptcy emergence. Don't assume it's the product of wide-scale agreements. Like past plans, the other parties will now comment and object or support all or parts. While he has a large number of victims as clients, Kosnoff is not a mediation party. If the TCC wanted to accomplish a global settlement with all the insurers by now it could have, at fractions of pennies on the dollar. If a plan transfers the insurance policies to a Trust it puts the trust in charge of litigating to maximize all insurance proceeds it can on behalf of victims. The fact that the TCC and Coalition aren't speaking suggests that they are working closely. If the past holds form, now that the BSA has filed a plan the TCC may schedule its next Town Hall soon.

We'll all have to be careful about the "headlines" when they appear after some sort of deal has been struck. This has a LOT of nuances but the media will take some amount, divide it by 82-85,000 victims and the sum will become the headline "BSA settles with Victims, Each to receive X." It's so much more complex. The funding that goes into any trust will come from not only the BSA/LCs but also COs and INSURERS. The insurers don't seem interested in a global settlement TODAY and won't roll over easily or quickly until they must. A LOT of the TCC's work right now must be wrapped up in the construction of all the processes that will continue after the BSA emerges. Then, it becomes a balancing act of gaining funds in a timely manner and avoiding an unnecessary litigation circus. We should actually be heartened that the TCC isn't feeding into any media feeding frenzy to make its points. This is billions of dollars at play and playing cards VERY close to the vest is a lot better than mistakenly allowing someone a peek because you said too much. That said, it IS agonizing for all victims and hopes are so easily dashed. Anyone who has lived in a State where every year legislation to change Statutes of Limitations never made it out of committee knows the pain when hopes are dashed. Victims, whether they consider themselves survivors or on the road to survivorship are some of the strongest people on the planet. If the insurers believe this is a group that will roll over easily then it will be a Trust's duty after it takes the baton from the TCC and Coalition to make it clear that the insurers may be grossly underestimating the fight and resolve of this group. Remember, "Justice delayed is justice denied." If only this was about justice. Alas, it isn't, it's bankruptcy so it's business. The BSA made that choice for all victims when it filed.

And for now, that means the BSA is the responsible party for having/filing a confirmable plan. If it wants out of bankruptcy on the schedule it already communicated then perhaps a plan will be filed in the next day or two.

It's probably pretty safe to assume that to a certain extent "No news is good news." This is the largest bankruptcy related to sexual abuse in history. Factor in CO's, LC's, future claimants, and the largest piece of the equation the insurers and the complexity is great. Every victim had hopes for the parties with financial exposure to be lining up checkbook in hand. That quickly vanished. So now it's a lot of sweating the details and everyone should all be reminded that if it's a BSA-only or BSA and LC-only settlement then the litigation against insurers will continue for potentially a long time since time is on their side. Welcome to the bankruptcy process. As well, welcome to the speed of the judicial process. Even those victims in States that were statute-friendly would be seeing their cases crawling through covid-impacted courts. So for many this process that's crawling along will still result in faster resolution or any sort of resolution at all if the abuse occurred in a statute unfriendly State. The TCC has reluctantly reminded claimants that this is "business" and wishes it weren't so. Safe to assume that the lack of updates and hearings means there's some sort of progress. For victims waiting for any sort of resolution after decades of hopes on hold it's understandably hard to be patient. Here's to better days soon.

The TCC has stated that it fully expects to have a statement included in any packet related to a vote. This is pretty standard bankruptcy procedure. I would assume that it will make its position well known and available for viewing as well. Remember though that in cases of this size victim attorneys often vote on behalf of their clients since they represent them and it's the client's responsibility to cast his/her vote separately or in consultation with the attorney if represented.