Chapter 11 announced

[RememberSchiff]

A teleconference  has been scheduled for today  Thursday, March 19, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. (ET) before the Honorable Laurie Selber Silverstein to review the status of matters scheduled to be heard at the omnibus hearing scheduled for March 24, 2020.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/807146_228.pdf

[SSScout]

On 3/15/2020 at 5:43 PM, Mrjeff said:

I realise that the Summits Perry Park is not a highly promoted venue but when I had an oppertunity to visit I was amazed at the opulence located in a scout camp and the learning center that is still under construction is a modern and amazing structure by any standards. Amazing and beautiful projects but I hope in ten years they are not boarded up and filled with cobwebs.

Here again, the parochialism of BSA shows thru.   The "need" to sell off Council camps and Scout Reservations because they donot pay their own way. The need to secure the pensions, pay, etc, of the pro staff.  WHen folks "decide" that a Scout Camp can ONLY be used by Scouts, thaleads to the problem.

 It is a matter of promotion, even in the present climate of self-quarantine and social distance, the properties can and should be made available to other appropriate groups.  Educational, conservation, scientific study, other camping/outdoorsy groups could pay the fee, use the ground and trails.  The NCAC gained a nice close in (fairly close) camp Snyder when a local real developer exchanged some wetland credits, shook some hands, and pleased the locals (who did not relish a new Disney park) . The use of Camp Snyder is offered and utilized by local school districts, lots of Scout Packs/Troops/OA/Wood Badge.  Church groups rent out the pavilions.  The trick is to make it known in the community, and put one person in charge of scheduling. 

[Mrjeff]

You know, I love Scouting for Scouting's sake.  There is nothing, not one little thing, that I can do about the bankruptcy or any of the unpopular decisions that were made by the nationa executive board. I would like to know the last time these people at the national or even regional levels actually went on a camping trip with a bunch of kids.  Anyway, there are things that I can do with the local troop, and in some cases, our local council. It doesnt matter to me what happens to the organization but I do know that our home town, local kids will still go on camping trips, hikes, and all of the other stuff that kids want to do.  I for one am tired about worrying about where the BSA is heading and am going to focus my attention where it can do some good. I know that many will not share my opinion but that's alright,  too.  I enjoy  Scouting for Scouting's sake and not to be involved with constant conflict and beurocratic nonsense. 

[RememberSchiff]

20 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

A teleconference  has been scheduled for today  Thursday, March 19, 2020, at 2:00 p.m. (ET) before the Honorable Laurie Selber Silverstein to review the status of matters scheduled to be heard at the omnibus hearing scheduled for March 24, 2020.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/807146_228.pdf

Confirmed telephone appearances (name, law firm, client) at Thurs March 19 conference. Some 75 attorneys. Updated status reports due to court  today March 20, 4pm and again March 23, noon.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/807366_240.pdf

[RememberSchiff]

Update 3/30/2020: Judge halts lawsuits against local Boy Scout Councils

Federal Bankruptcy Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein has granted a request by the Boy Scouts of America to halt lawsuits against local Scout councils as the BSA works on its bankruptcy plan to set up a compensation fund for thousands of men who were molested as boys by Scout leaders.

The Boy Scouts initially sought to halt all litigation against local councils for six months from the date of its Feb. 18 bankruptcy filing. The agreement forged with the creditors committees calls for the lawsuits to be put on hold through May 18, with the possibility of an extension.

"In the scheme of litigation, a stay of 55 days is not a long time, or for that matter, even unusual," Silverstein said.

In granting the BSA's request for a preliminary injunction, Silverstein said the interests and missions of the BSA and its local councils are "inextricably intertwined."

The judge noted that the BSA and local councils also are covered under a single excess insurance policy, and that BSA has played a key role in defending lawsuits by abuse survivors. The insurance policy in question once had a $25 million limit but now stands at about $18 million because of previous settlements.

More at Source:

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2020-03-30/judge-halts-lawsuits-against-local-boy-scout-councils

Edited March 30, 2020 by RememberSchiff

[InquisitiveScouter]

This could mean the court will also deny Nationals move to have the court view the councils as separate entities for purposes of the overall litigation.   Better go take some nice pictures of the camp you grew up with...it could be gone in the near future...

[RememberSchiff]

10 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

This could mean the court will also deny Nationals move to have the court view the councils as separate entities for purposes of the overall litigation.   Better go take some nice pictures of the camp you grew up with...it could be gone in the near future...

"inextricably intertwined"...You may be correct. In the 3/30/2020 consent order, the Court labels local councils and charter organizations as "BSA Related Parties"  and not "separate entities" as these councils and charter organization are also defendants (Schedule 2) with the debtor, the BSA in the Pending Abuse Actions" listed in Schedule 1.

Here's the 3/30/2020 consent order link:

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/810262_54.pdf

On Pages 5-6, after the Whereas's

After due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor; THE COURT FINDS AND CONCLUDES THAT:

A.The Plaintiff in this adversary proceeding is the debtor, the BSA. Attached hereto as Schedule 1 is a list of lawsuits or claims (collectively, the “Pending Abuse Actions”) against the BSA and/or the BSA Related Parties set forth on Schedule 2 attached hereto (the “BSA Related Parties”). The BSA Related Parties consist of (i) non-debtor Learning for Life, a non-stock organization affiliated with the BSA, (ii) local councils, which the BSA represents are independently incorporated under the non-profit laws of their respective states (the “Local Councils”), and (iii) community and religious organizations, businesses, and groups of citizens that organize Scouting units under the BSA charter and are named defendants in the Pending Abuse Actions (and no others). The Pending Abuse Actions include the (a) Pending Abuse Actions, as defined in the Motion, that were pending as of the Petition Date, and (b) actions that have been filed or otherwise asserted against the BSA and/or the named BSA Related Parties on or after the Petition Date, alleging that the BSA and/or the BSA Related Parties are liable to the applicable plaintiff on account of abuse perpetrated against such plaintiff. The Defendants in this adversary proceeding are those parties listed in the “Underlying Plaintiffs” column of Exhibit A to the Complaint. The Defendants in the adversary proceeding are all plaintiffs in lawsuits that seek to hold the BSA and/or the BSA Related Parties liable in actions that include claims and/or causes of action allegedly arising out of the plaintiffs’ involvement or connection with the BSA.

[Sentinel947]

I can't tell if the BSA is arguing that the Councils are separate and should not be sued, or are part of the settlement with National and cannot be sued directly. 

[HashTagScouts]

2 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

I can't tell if the BSA is arguing that the Councils are separate and should not be sued, or are part of the settlement with National and cannot be sued directly. 

That was my take as well.  it's like they are arguing with themselves.

[dkurtenbach]

This was a "consent" order, meaning that the main interested parties agreed to it, wrote it up, and asked the judge to sign it.  BSA and the other parties are saying that:

• Not only is the national organization being sued by abuse victims, but so are Learning for Life, numerous councils, chartered organizations, and others who have not filed bankruptcy. 
• And while the bankruptcy prevents all of those lawsuits from moving forward against the national organization, it doesn't prevent those abuse lawsuits from moving forward against all of the other parties.
• But if those hundreds of abuse lawsuits move forward in a piecemeal fashion against everyone else, it will necessarily require the national organization to do a lot of work and spend a lot of money because even though they are all separate organizations, they all have lots of business and contractual ties and lots of shared information.
• It will also be very expensive for all of those plaintiffs all over the country to continue their lawsuits separately against the councils and other parties.
• And if the national organization has to spend a lot of resources on these continuing abuse lawsuits all over the country, there will be a lot less money available to those plaintiffs from the national organization, once their claims are determined in the bankruptcy.
• So it is in everyone's interest to hit "pause" on the lawsuits against the councils and other defendants so they don't waste BSA's money, their own money, and the money of the other defendants while they try to figure out if they can do a global settlement among BSA national and all of the plaintiffs and all of the councils and other defendants.

[RememberSchiff]

20 hours ago, dkurtenbach said:

• So it is in everyone's interest to hit "pause" on the lawsuits against the councils and other defendants so they don't waste BSA's money, their own money, and the money of the other defendants while they try to figure out if they can do a global settlement among BSA national and all of the plaintiffs and all of the councils and other defendants.

Speaking of which, what a long road this has been.

DECLARATION OF RACHEL KASSABIAN IN SUPPORT OF DEBTORS’ OBJECTION TO GIRL SCOUTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY TO RESUME TRADEMARK ACTION

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/810638_322.pdf

DEBTORS’ OBJECTION TO GIRL SCOUTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY TO RESUME TRADEMARK ACTION

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/810632_320.pdf

^----  IMHO, the latter (6 pages) was well argued, particularly, items 6 and 7.

6. The BSA is currently devoting significant managerial, financial, legal, and other resources toward its restructuring efforts. Specifically, the BSA’s leadership is presently undertaking the following tasks related to the bankruptcy: (i) the preparation of statements and schedules for the U.S. Trustee and other constituencies; (ii) the identification and assembly of materials responsive to numerous document requests propounded by the TCC’s and UCC’s counsels and advisors; (iii) engaging with and fielding requests from various media organizations regarding the BSA’s restructuring and its ability to continue Scouting activities while these Chapter 11 Cases are pending; (iv) engaging in preparations for the upcoming meeting of creditors to be held pursuant to Section 341 of the Bankruptcy Code, which is currently scheduled for April 15; (v) assisting in the preparation of periodic presentations to various constituencies regarding the BSA’s financial position, forecasts, and restructuring plan; and (vi) implementing expense reductions and other organizational improvements necessary to meet the Debtors’ 2020 budget. The “breathing spell” afforded by the automatic stay has been essential to the BSA’s ability to continue to proceed as expeditiously as it has in these early stages of the bankruptcy.

7. In addition, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has amplified the strain on the BSA’s senior management and other organizational resources. In light of the social distancing measures adopted throughout the country and the drain those measures have had on the organization’s revenues, the BSA was forced to furlough a large portion of its workforce effective April 1, 2020. The BSA’s senior leadership is also preparing a revised 2020 business plan and cash flow forecast that will better account for the increased financial and operational uncertainty arising from the pandemic. Those efforts include modeling new revenue projections and exploring various cost-reduction levers. The BSA’s senior management is also engaged in efforts to continue alternative programming to its members when most traditional BSA programming is suspended. The substantial reduction in staff, together with the additional work associated with adapting to the new realities of this pandemic, will impose significant additional burdens on the employees who remain.

...

signed Brian Whittman, Managing Director at Alvarez & Marsal North America, LLC (“A&M”), a limited liability corporation, which has served as a restructuring advisor to the Boy Scouts of America (the “BSA”) and Delaware BSA, LLC, the non-profit corporations that are debtors and debtors in possession in the above-captioned Chapter 11 Cases (together, the “Debtors”), since October 2018

Edited April 1, 2020 by RememberSchiff
added second objection

[Mrjeff]

Parkman:  That is not exactly what I said and normally I dont have to explain my meaning because it is usually very clear.  What I said is the BSA was a "private club" where the members have the same wants, expectations, moral and spiritual beliefs, and sence of right and wrong. You paid a fee, filled out an application and joined the club.  As a member of that club I voluntarily agree to follow the clubs rules, it's that simple.  I have no right to join the club and expect the members to change to appease me and if I dont like the rules, I shouldn't be a member of the club.  The BSA changed the rules to satisfy the needs of the individual,which in MY OPINION, was the beginning of this whole mess.  A person can't join the country club and expect the club to change their standing rules just to please people who may join.  There are a lot of organizations that dont do that: little league teams; football teams; home owners associations; ........and the list goes on and on.   If a person doesnt like the rules, it's up to them to start their own club, find a club that they like, or just dont play.  You can substitute BSA for the word club as you wish.  And if you boil down the entire stew all that is left is the issue of money.  

 

 

[TAHAWK]

For decades, the Law was exactly or substantially this:  "A Scout is obedient.  A Scout follows the rules of his family, school,and troop.  He obeys the laws of his community and country.  If  he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he seeks to have them changed in an orderly way."  

 

This has been changed recently on the BSA website to: "Follow the rules of your family, school, and pack. Obey the laws of your community and country."

 "Meine Ehre heißt Treue"

[Mrjeff]

I agree to a point.  I know of no survey, questionnaire, or petition that was distributed to the members asking for these changes.  The changes were initiated by individuals who were not members and wanted to be part of a club that did not follow their rules.  If I belong to a club that only drinks grape juice and a non-member who only drinks orange juice demands admittance,  the club rules shouldn't change just to accommodate the orange juice drinker.  It's my choice to associate with the grape juice drinkers and because it is a private club, I shouldn't be forced to accept orange juice.  It's just that simple. 

[TAHAWK]

Were does it say you must drink orange juice?  It's that last step - you must do it our way and like it - that makes me crazy.  They want more than tolerance; they want control.