CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 (edited) RSA 1.0 is dead. Behold: RSA 2.0 was just filed! Reading through it now. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/ebb2c5f5-b7ba-4976-827b-ced854f51e1e_5813.pdf 1) This version adds State Court Counsel representing at least 67000 claimants 2) 30 days for judge to confirm (August 27) or it lapses again. 3) There's a new item added: if either side disagrees with the way in which the COs are the dealt with in the reorg plan, either side can walk and the RSA is void. This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants (67,000 out of 82,500). Edited July 28, 2021 by CynicalScouter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: RSA 1.0 is dead. Behold: RSA 2.0 was just filed! Reading through it now. Please advise as to the presence or absence of Zombies. I’m still wary and will await the “all clear” signal. Do use your flags, if you don’t mind. I’d like to test my memory, even though I hated that merit badge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 4 minutes ago, ThenNow said: Please advise as to the presence or absence of Zombies. I’m still wary and will await the “all clear” signal. Do use your flags, if you don’t mind. I’d like to test my memory, even though I hated that merit badge. This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants (67,000 out of 82,500). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 (edited) 23 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants (67,000 out of 82,500). So, what does that mean for the balance of claimants? Ciphering isn’t my forte, but those numbers don’t seem to match. Ain’t nuttin global about that to me. If it is, I guess fifteen and a half thousand of us weren’t properly tethered and got plum spun off the orb. Edited July 28, 2021 by ThenNow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 This is the global deal BSA has been begging for. Lawyers representing over 70,185 claims have now agreed to RSA 2.0. It is listed as Schedule 3 in RSA 2.0 document. Quote PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the revised Schedule 1 to the RSA, which lists each State Court Counsel that is Party to the RSA, is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. FIRM CLAIMS Slater Slater Schulman LLP 14170 ASK LLP 3277 Andrews & Thornton, AAL, ALC 3009 Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. 16869 Junell & Associates PLLC 2918 Reich & Binstock LLP 336 Krause & Kinsman Law Firm 5981 Bailey Cowan Heckaman PLLC 1026 Jason J. Joy & Associates, PLLC 690 Motley Rice LLC 343 Weller Green Toups & Terrell LLP 974 Colter Legal PLLC 162 Christina Pendleton & Associates, PLLC 309 Forman Law Offices, P.A. 125 Danziger & De Llano LLP 173 Swenson & Shelley 175 Cohen Hirsch LP (formerly Brooke F. Cohen Law, Hirsch Law Firm) 64 Damon J. Baldone PLC 471 Cutter Law, P.C. 358 Linville Johnson & Pahlke Law Group 71 Porter & Malouf P.A. 86 The Moody Law Firm 677 Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Rafferty & Procter P.A. 44 Marc J Bern & Partners LLP 5893 Napoli Shkolnik PLLC 1300 Freese & Goss, PLLC 458 Hair Shunnarah Trial Attorneys 47 D. Miller and Associates, PLLC 3008 Hilliard Martinez Gonzales LLP 289 Oldham & Smith, PL 24 Mary Alexander and Associates, P.C. 74 McDonald Worley, P.C. 140 TorHoerman Law, LLC 125 Gibbs Law Group 179 Paluch Law, LLC 139 Hurley McKenna and Mertz, P.C. 4000 Davis Bethune Jones 1054 Philadelphia Lawyers Group 135 Babin Law, LLC 1012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 2 minutes ago, ThenNow said: but those numbers don’t seem to match. Ain’t nuttin global about that to me. If it is, I guess fifteen and a half thousand of us weren’t properly tethered and got plum spun off the orb. The point I think is that number reached the 2/3rds needed (82,500*2/3=55,000) in order to approve this plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said: The point I think is that number reached the 2/3rds needed (82,500*2/3=55,000) in order to approve this plan. Sounds to me like there are Zombies. Didn’t I hear someone singing, “Ding dong, the Plan is dead”? I know! It’s FrankenPlan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted July 28, 2021 Author Share Posted July 28, 2021 29 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: RSA 1.0 is dead. Behold: RSA 2.0 was just filed! Reading through it now. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/ebb2c5f5-b7ba-4976-827b-ced854f51e1e_5813.pdf 1) This version adds State Court Counsel representing at least 67000 claimants 2) 30 days for judge to confirm (August 27) or it lapses again. 3) There's a new item added: if either side disagrees with the way in which the COs are the dealt with in the reorg plan, either side can walk and the RSA is void. This looks like the global deal they've been wanting. This covers almost ALL claimants (67,000 out of 82,500). Why let the last one expire? I don’t get it… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 1 minute ago, ThenNow said: Didn’t I hear someone singing, “Ding dong, the Plan is dead”? That plan was. This is Plan 2.0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted July 28, 2021 Author Share Posted July 28, 2021 6 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: Lawyers representing over 70,185 claims have now agreed to RSA 2.0. It is listed as Schedule 3 in RSA 2.0 document. Quote Did Kosnoff sign on? I thought he represented 17,000 and there are 84,000 claims. Something fishy…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said: Why let the last one expire? I don’t get it… 1) The amendments change several items. 2) BSA was trying to line up all these claimant counsel and ran out of time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 Just now, CynicalScouter said: That plan was. This is Plan 2.0. Okay. Whatever. Just joshing ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: Did Kosnoff sign on? I thought he represented 17,000 and there are 84,000 claims. Something fishy…. He didn't. And I think that's the question of the Rule 2019 motion tomorrow: How many people does Kosnoff REALLY represent? The math is just not adding up here. Edited July 28, 2021 by CynicalScouter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 8 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: He didn't. And I think that's the question of the Rule 2019 motion tomorrow: Now many people does Kosnoff REALLY represent? The math is just not adding up here. I don’t see my law firm on the list and they are supposedly representing 1600 claimants. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: Did Kosnoff sign on? I thought he represented 17,000 and there are 84,000 claims. Something fishy…. Ok, I know the general rule is no posting pictures unless they are relevant, but I'm posting the JPEGs listing all attorneys and the number of claims that are now party to RSA 2.0 (hereinafter the Zombie RSA). I just cannot see how Kosnoff can claim he represents 17,000 people. The only thing, and this is a guess, is that this is counting number of CLAIMS and not number of CLAIMANTS? Or the lawfirms listed are over-inflating their numbers? I just don't get it. Edited July 28, 2021 by CynicalScouter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts