Reply to LAMB Sued for $20M by 2 families of sexual abuse victims

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "LAMB Sued for $20M by 2 families of sexual abuse victims"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It seems that the last thing anyone should be worried about is this non-profit school closing because of a lawsuit.  A quick glance at the 2015 and 2014 budgets for LAMB suggests that the school's finances are not structured in such a way that a lawsuit could touch the bulk of their operating expenses.  In 2015, about $7.3 million of the schools $7.5 million budget came from revenue sources that cannot be touched by a lawsuit -- the DC per capita student money, after school care fees, and federal grants.  (See page 6 of this document-- http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/report/FY15%20Audited%20Financial%20Statements%20-%20LAMB.pdf)

So long as the DC govt doesn't close the school, which it wouldn't given the shrieks of anguish they'd have to deal with from the 350 students' parents, the school will continue to receive almost all of its usual revenue regardless of how the lawsuit turns out, which means they wouldn't be forced to close for financial reasons.  Sure, they may have to tighten their belts if enough donors and others decide they aren't interested in being associated with the school anymore and cut back on donations.  And their insurance premium will likely go up after this.  But they have an untouchable and steady revenue stream, so they aren't going to close even if there is a judgement for many millions of dollars.

Typically what happens when a jury awards a plaintiff more than the defendant can pay is that the court places something akin to a lien against future assets.  In theory, if a billionaire gave the school $100 million in unrestricted funds down the line, the plaintiffs could go after that money in an  effort to satisfy their jury award claim.  But no donor would ever give a non-profit money in that way, assuming they aren't total idiots.

[/quote]

Do not know where to start. Guessing you are a 3-5th year at a law firm who thinks you know what you are talking about. I dare you to sign this. Please, I'm begging you! Let's see who the bigwig on DCUM is. How many hundreds of these trials have you first or 2nd chaired? Please tell us oh wise legal scholar.

The think about seasoned lawyers is that the more you learn and see, the more you realize there are no certainties. Please do not confuse your T-25 law school education and 3 years doing doc review at BigLaw with actual legal experience. I'm reminded of the people who just knew that Big Tobacco wouldn't lose the state lawsuits. Everyone knew it. Some states knew it so much that they allowed Peter Angelos to take the case with a 25% cut of recovery. He cashed a $1 billion check (with a B).

[/quote]

What a bizarre response. Of course there are no guarantees. That cuts both ways.

-“Seasoned lawyer”[/quote]

Again, Mr "Seasoned Lawyer," what makes you think those revenue streams are immune from collection?  Maybe they are, but just because they're not literally in back accounts doesn't mean they can't be subject to a judgment.  [/quote]

I’m not the attorney who wrote that. I’m a different attorney who thinks you sound nuts. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics