MYCVAStory Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 12 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: Lauria's argument is basically the objectors (TCC, etc.) will never be satisfied, so let's get on with it. Well, between that argument and the fact that a mediator didn't sign the last mediation report it tells you a lot about how well mediation went and how the Coalition and BSA have become strange bedfellows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 3 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said: Well, between that argument and the fact that a mediator didn't sign the last mediation report it tells you a lot about how well mediation went and how the Coalition and BSA have become strange bedfellows. The last time Finn didn't sign a mediator's report, there was a note as to why "Due to a previously scheduled conflict, Mr. Paul A. Finn was unable to attend today’s mediation sessions." https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/5f6aab30-8bb9-4ec6-870b-f4acfbf4e412_5284.pdf The fact that Finn did NOT have that footnote put in speaks volumes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Attorney for Ad Hoc Committee of LCs: cash flow issues starting "next year". Remember: BSA has been claiming cash flow issues will happen last summer, July, August, etc. It is all "we are about to run out of cash, we got to get this done." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Bob Brady for FCR keeps saying the plan has "significant survivor support". No, there is significant LAWYER support. That does not automatically = survivor support. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Lawyer for Methodist/Catholics: There is no resolution and my clients do NOT support. It was never an agreement that was reached with COs (other than LDS). We need more time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 (edited) Stang: "The debtor doesn't deserve anything. The victims deserve adequate information." This in response to Lauria saying BSA "deserves" to have the disclosure heard. Edited September 21, 2021 by CynicalScouter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Stang: The BSA ice cube may be melting, but the Local Councils are GROWING. This is a reference to the fact that many councils have MORE money than they did thanks to endowments growing due to the stock market. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Just now, CynicalScouter said: Stang: The BSA ice cube may be melting, but the Local Councils are GROWING. This is a reference to the fact that many councils have MORE money than they did thanks to endowments growing due to the stock market. It sounds like that will be a upcoming focus of discussion by the TCC. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Stang: the only reason TCC agreed to RSA was RSA would have under its terms veto-right over any settlements. The moment that ended, settlements (Hartford 2.0, LDS) happened. So yes, TCC agreed to RSA, but that veto-right was the key reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Feb 2021/June 2021 .... LC assets increased $80M. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said: It sounds like that will be a upcoming focus of discussion by the TCC. Stang: February 1, 2021 vs. June 1, 2021: $80 million increase in Local Council assets thanks to stock market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Judge denying request, but will start on the 4th amended plan objections which will give time to object to the 5th amended plan. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted September 21, 2021 Author Share Posted September 21, 2021 Judge: Two hours into this hearing. We need to start working on disclosure statement issues. Sensitive to timing of the filing of the documents and the time frame attorneys have had to review the documents. But, we need to start on the many objections already filed to find out what is remaining to 4th plan and then work on the objections to 5th plan. People have clearly read the documents. More information is not always best, we need salient information. I don't think adding more information is going to be the end of the information gathering. So we need to get to discovery. Motion to delay 2 weeks denied. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Discovery must start and that can only start if she starts hearing on the plan. She doesn't see a benefit in a delay. More info isn't always better. She has some questions about the plan that she hopes to get answered this week. Another couple of weeks simply push this off, discussions must start now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 2 hours ago, CynicalScouter said: Lauria says that attorneys representing 81.3% of abuse claimants now approve the new Hartford plan. That does NOT mean 81.3% of abuse claimants approve it of course. Can lawyers submit the votes for the clients they represent? Or do they need signatures of the actual clients? ... and on a sarcastic note ... what if hundreds / thousands of those signatures all happen in a few minutes right before the deadline and are mailed from the same place? So that should be acceptable to preserve clients rights against a deadline right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts