The Boy Scout Bankruptcy Trust and re-organization plan will move forward sans more Appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States. The appeal has met its decision by the Appeals Judge.
“The Bankruptcy Code prevents us from disrupting the nonconsensual third-party releases in BSA’s Plan at this late stage,” the court said. “If proposed today, the Plan would be unconfirmable in the wake of Purdue and the Lujan and D&V Claimants could not have their claims released without their consent. And that temporal happenstance, we recognize, is a bitter pill to swallow.”
Gilion Dumas of Dumas & Vaughn LLC, an attorney who fought against the plan’s third-party releases, said she and her clients are disappointed with the “harsh result” of the court’s decision and are considering appeal options.
“This is a sad day for all victims of sexual abuse in Scouting,” Dumas said in a statement. “The court did not address the merits of our appeal, but dismissed on a statutory technicality.”
The court also rejected challenges raised by several Boy Scouts insurance providers that refused to settle their coverage liabilities in bankruptcy, saying the plan keeps intact their contractual rights and defenses to paying out claims under their applicable policies.
In its sole disagreement with the lower courts, the Third Circuit said that the Allianz insurers should be allowed to recover excess claims they incur in coverage litigation from the insurers that settled with Boy Scouts.
“The judgment reduction clause impermissibly releases contribution and indemnification claims the Allianz Insurers otherwise would be able to assert,” the opinion said.
Judge Anthony J. Scirica joined the majority. Judge Marjorie O. Rendell wrote a concurring opinion.” – https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/boy-scouts-bankruptcy-plan-survives-appeal-over-liability-shield
This is a deeply disappointing outcome for the victims of sexual abuse in Scouting. The court’s decision to dismiss the appeal on a technicality rather than addressing its merits feels like a missed opportunity for justice. It’s concerning that the focus seems to be on protecting insurers’ rights rather than prioritizing the victims’ needs. How can the legal system ensure that survivors are truly heard and compensated fairly? The fact that Allianz insurers are allowed to recover excess claims adds another layer of complexity to an already convoluted situation. This decision raises questions about the balance between corporate interests and moral responsibility. What steps can be taken to prevent such outcomes in the future?
We’ve integrated libersave into our regional voucher system. It’s amazing how easily it allows us to consolidate various providers on a single platform.