SNEScouter

For those following along at home, it seems like a good time for a look at Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_8

Omni created a new docket for the appeals here: Consolidated Appeals of Confirmation Order Lengthy scheduling order is here: https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/e4a87bc5-4d56-40e5-bff6-4bcc044476c2_22.pdf TL;DR on scheduling order - look for briefs from plan opponents by Monday Nov. 7. Response brief of Debtors (and maybe other plan supporters) on Dec. 7. Replies on Dec. 21. Oral argument date TBD.

The allocation of authority between a bankruptcy court and a district court, and the standard of review that applies, are very complicated legal questions in an already-complicated bankruptcy case. Here's a somewhat relevant article co-authored by ... you guessed it.... Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein. https://www.potteranderson.com/newsroom-publications-14.html. This article mostly addresses the situation where a bankruptcy court does not have authority to enter a final order on a particular matter. In that event the bankruptcy judge issues proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for the district court to consider and adopt after de novo review. To the best of my knowledge, that's not what happened here, as Judge Silverstein ultimately found that she had authority to enter the confirmation order in its final form, which was then appealed to District Court. Still it's a useful read.

That is all I meant to imply - that the confirmation order is signed. I'll defer to others about where we go from here, but clearly a new phase of the proceedings is before us. Almost time for a new thread....

It's done. Judge Silverstein signed the order moments ago. I'm sure it will hit the Omni website in a few minutes.

Plan confirmation appears imminent. At 4:34 p.m., the Debtors filed a Certification of Counsel containing the proposed confirmation order. I have to assume the judge will sign it shortly. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/30d9864f-e690-4bbf-bafd-5aa47f0aa12e_10310.pdf

Also it was the only matter on the judge’s calendar on a Friday before a 3-day weekend.

The document you want is Exhibit D-2 to the Disclosure Statement. The Solicitation version (Docket No. 6445) is linked here: https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/da60d7ce-df85-45e9-9737-4dd1a5d50014_6445.pdf Relevant section starts on Page 353.

Yes, that's all they can argue. For bankruptcy purposes, it technically remains an active claim (albeit disputed) because in theory GSA can appeal, have it sent back to district court for trial, & eventually win. But I wouldn't expect Judge Silverstein to spend much time on the GSA objection to plan confirmation.

To recap, according to the voting report (Docket 8141), Class 7 (Non-Abuse Litigation Claims) had 6 voting claims of which 4 voted to accept the plan and 2 voted against. Presumably the Girl Scouts of America (GSA) was one of the "no" votes. Each claim was estimated for voting purposes at $1.00 and so the class as a whole accepted the plan with exactly 2/3s voting in favor. According to the linked story, GSA will appeal. If so, it may not have much effect on their right to participate in the bankruptcy until appeals are exhausted. GSA can continue to object, although it sure does seem like a waste of money at this point. Moreover, as a practical matter, the loss in the trial court could cause Judge Silverstein to give less weight to GSA objections to the plan, if only tacitly. GSA objected to being placed in Class 7 with wrongful death / tort / other miscellaneous litigation claims. BSA can now point to the recent judgment, state that GSA's claim is worth zero, and argue "who cares" about classification of a zero dollar claim.

Anyone watching the confirmation trial ... have they said anything about scheduling? Do they expect to wrap up testimony any time soon?

Similar to the TCC but instead of survivors, this committee represents other miscellaneous / trade creditors with claims against BSA. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/804598_141.pdf

I attended the World Scout Jamboree in 2019. I got a very small glimpse of what Scouting is like in other countries. Based on those observations, I’d suggest two areas of improvement: 1) Reduce barriers to entry. As discussed elsewhere, with registration fees are going up. There probably is not much we can do about that, but do Cub Scouts really need to spend so money on uniforms? A t-shirt and jeans/shorts are enough. 2) Other countries have very active Scouting programs for 18-25 year olds, and they leverage those 18-25 y/os to provide leadership to the younger Scouts. Colleges have Scouting orgs within them that help maintain the connection to Scouting. BSA could benefit from this.

It appears that the Form Council Letter of Intent was intnended to be included for reference purposes. However, it may have been at the top of a 20-page stack of documents, when it really was intended to be an exhibit at the bottom of the pile. When the LOI is the first thing that the CO reads, it is easy for that CO to conclude that someone is asking them to contribute assets, when that isn't the case. If your CO gets this package, they should just focus on the FAQ document first.

I just saw the package that was mailed to Charter Orgs. It included an FAQ document, Notice of Confirmation Hearing, and a sample Form Of Letter of Intent from Councils in which the Councils commit to contributing to the Settlement Trust. That Form LOI (which as I recall is in the approved Disclosure Statement) also calls for Councils to disclose real estate assets, etc., relating to the real estate portion of the Council contributions. My sense is that the documents might have been put into envelopes out of order, leading to some confusion.