Paternos get discovery

[ihs82]

Judge rejects NCAA's motion for dismissal based on lack of standing. Case moves forward to discovery. I'm sure the NCAA will be loaded with a ton of stalling tactics but bottom line is a lot of people who don't want to speak are going to forced to speak.

[ihs82]

here's the link if you want to read the full opinion: co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/PATERNO%20VS%20NCAA%20OPINION%20AND%20ORDER%20REGARDING%20PRELIMINARY%20OBJECTIONS.pdf

here's a pretty good short summary:

There were 5 preliminary objections made by the NCAA that were ruled upon today: (1) Failure to join an indispensable party, being Penn State University, (2) demurrer as to defamation claim, (3) demurrer to commercial disparagement claim on behalf of Paterno, (4) demurrer to intentional interference with prospective contract claim, and (5) demurrer to civil conspiracy claim.

(1) Failure to join and indispensable party:

The objection was sustained by the court. Penn State must be included as a party. The suit seeks to void the consent decree, and that impacts Penn State because if it is thrown out, then the NCAA could very well attempt to go through its normal investigation process and sanction Penn State as they threatened to, so Penn State must be included. Plaintiffs will be permitted to amend the complaint to include Penn State.

(2) Objection to the defamation claim:

This objection was sustained in part and overruled in part. It was sustained (court agreed with NCAA and tossed) as to the defamatory statements towards the Penn State community at large because that group is too big to show that any member of the Penn State community was targeted personally. However, the objection was overruled as to two statements from the consent decree: (1) the claim that the BoT failed to oversee the administration and failing to create an environment where the administration felt accountable, and (2) the claim that coaches, administrators and football staff ignored red flags of Sandusky's behavior and failed to warn the public.

(3) Objection to commercial disparagement claim:

This objection is in regards to the Paterno's claim that the consent decree harmed the property and reputation value of Paterno's name. This objection was overruled.

(4) Objection to intentional interference with prospective contract claim

This objection to the coaches claim that the consent decree disparagement stopped them from getting future employment was sustained because they did not sufficiently show with specificity what contracts they lost out on, but rather could only show that they lost out on the 'mere hope' of future employment. However, they may file an amended complaint to specify.

(5) Objection to civil conspiracy claim

This one is my favorite. The objection to the civil conspiracy claim, that is the claim that the NCAA and Freeh worked together to maliciously harm the plaintiffs, was overruled.


If the Paternos want to continue to challenge the consent decree, they have to sue the University (make them a defendant). But, the judge has ruled that the Paternos can still move forward against the NCAA for other remedies because the NCAA maliciously conspired w/ Freeh to harm them. Emmert, Ray, Erickson can all be subpoenaed.

[oujour76]

Jan 7, 2014 17:25:36 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

here's the link if you want to read the full opinion: co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/PATERNO%20VS%20NCAA%20OPINION%20AND%20ORDER%20REGARDING%20PRELIMINARY%20OBJECTIONS.pdf

here's a pretty good short summary:

There were 5 preliminary objections made by the NCAA that were ruled upon today: (1) Failure to join an indispensable party, being Penn State University, (2) demurrer as to defamation claim, (3) demurrer to commercial disparagement claim on behalf of Paterno, (4) demurrer to intentional interference with prospective contract claim, and (5) demurrer to civil conspiracy claim.

(1) Failure to join and indispensable party:

The objection was sustained by the court. Penn State must be included as a party. The suit seeks to void the consent decree, and that impacts Penn State because if it is thrown out, then the NCAA could very well attempt to go through its normal investigation process and sanction Penn State as they threatened to, so Penn State must be included. Plaintiffs will be permitted to amend the complaint to include Penn State.

(2) Objection to the defamation claim:

This objection was sustained in part and overruled in part. It was sustained (court agreed with NCAA and tossed) as to the defamatory statements towards the Penn State community at large because that group is too big to show that any member of the Penn State community was targeted personally. However, the objection was overruled as to two statements from the consent decree: (1) the claim that the BoT failed to oversee the administration and failing to create an environment where the administration felt accountable, and (2) the claim that coaches, administrators and football staff ignored red flags of Sandusky's behavior and failed to warn the public.

(3) Objection to commercial disparagement claim:

This objection is in regards to the Paterno's claim that the consent decree harmed the property and reputation value of Paterno's name. This objection was overruled.

(4) Objection to intentional interference with prospective contract claim

This objection to the coaches claim that the consent decree disparagement stopped them from getting future employment was sustained because they did not sufficiently show with specificity what contracts they lost out on, but rather could only show that they lost out on the 'mere hope' of future employment. However, they may file an amended complaint to specify.

(5) Objection to civil conspiracy claim

This one is my favorite. The objection to the civil conspiracy claim, that is the claim that the NCAA and Freeh worked together to maliciously harm the plaintiffs, was overruled.


If the Paternos want to continue to challenge the consent decree, they have to sue the University (make them a defendant). But, the judge has ruled that the Paternos can still move forward against the NCAA for other remedies because the NCAA maliciously conspired w/ Freeh to harm them. Emmert, Ray, Erickson can all be subpoenaed.

Hope the Paterno family has very deep pockets. And at the end of the day, all I can say is...what a f-ing mess.

[Deleted]

Jan 7, 2014 19:25:04 GMT -5 daleko said:

Jan 7, 2014 17:51:00 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Hope the Paterno family has very deep pockets. And at the end of the day, all I can say is...what a f-ing mess.

This was all on Discovery channel? Hell I think I get Discovery.

No wonder our system is so fucked up.....ONLY POS lawyers kould kumm up with this bullshit that nobody else kann understand....

[ihs82]

Jan 7, 2014 17:51:00 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Jan 7, 2014 17:25:36 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

here's the link if you want to read the full opinion: co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/PATERNO%20VS%20NCAA%20OPINION%20AND%20ORDER%20REGARDING%20PRELIMINARY%20OBJECTIONS.pdf

here's a pretty good short summary:

There were 5 preliminary objections made by the NCAA that were ruled upon today: (1) Failure to join an indispensable party, being Penn State University, (2) demurrer as to defamation claim, (3) demurrer to commercial disparagement claim on behalf of Paterno, (4) demurrer to intentional interference with prospective contract claim, and (5) demurrer to civil conspiracy claim.

(1) Failure to join and indispensable party:

The objection was sustained by the court. Penn State must be included as a party. The suit seeks to void the consent decree, and that impacts Penn State because if it is thrown out, then the NCAA could very well attempt to go through its normal investigation process and sanction Penn State as they threatened to, so Penn State must be included. Plaintiffs will be permitted to amend the complaint to include Penn State.

(2) Objection to the defamation claim:

This objection was sustained in part and overruled in part. It was sustained (court agreed with NCAA and tossed) as to the defamatory statements towards the Penn State community at large because that group is too big to show that any member of the Penn State community was targeted personally. However, the objection was overruled as to two statements from the consent decree: (1) the claim that the BoT failed to oversee the administration and failing to create an environment where the administration felt accountable, and (2) the claim that coaches, administrators and football staff ignored red flags of Sandusky's behavior and failed to warn the public.

(3) Objection to commercial disparagement claim:

This objection is in regards to the Paterno's claim that the consent decree harmed the property and reputation value of Paterno's name. This objection was overruled.

(4) Objection to intentional interference with prospective contract claim

This objection to the coaches claim that the consent decree disparagement stopped them from getting future employment was sustained because they did not sufficiently show with specificity what contracts they lost out on, but rather could only show that they lost out on the 'mere hope' of future employment. However, they may file an amended complaint to specify.

(5) Objection to civil conspiracy claim

This one is my favorite. The objection to the civil conspiracy claim, that is the claim that the NCAA and Freeh worked together to maliciously harm the plaintiffs, was overruled.


If the Paternos want to continue to challenge the consent decree, they have to sue the University (make them a defendant). But, the judge has ruled that the Paternos can still move forward against the NCAA for other remedies because the NCAA maliciously conspired w/ Freeh to harm them. Emmert, Ray, Erickson can all be subpoenaed.

Hope the Paterno family has very deep pockets. And at the end of the day, all I can say is...what a f-ing mess.

They do but it's not really that big of a mess. The family can't overrule the consent decree anymore which isn't really a big deal but they now give the NCAA a choice: apologize and privately settle or answer some questions related to decisions they made.

[oujour76]

Jan 7, 2014 22:30:33 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

Jan 7, 2014 17:51:00 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Hope the Paterno family has very deep pockets. And at the end of the day, all I can say is...what a f-ing mess.

They do but it's not really that big of a mess. The family can't overrule the consent decree anymore which isn't really a big deal but they now give the NCAA a choice: apologize and privately settle or answer some questions related to decisions they made.

LOL. It appears to me that you have never been involved in a "civil" lawsuit. The legal meter has just now started to run and this is the second inning or so in a nine inning game. The NCAA is not going to apologize to anybody. It's not who they are nor is it what they do. I agree that this thing is likely to settle...just like 90% or more of all civil lawsuits.

[ihs82]

Jan 8, 2014 12:33:25 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Jan 7, 2014 22:30:33 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

They do but it's not really that big of a mess. The family can't overrule the consent decree anymore which isn't really a big deal but they now give the NCAA a choice: apologize and privately settle or answer some questions related to decisions they made.

LOL. It appears to me that you have never been involved in a "civil" lawsuit. The legal meter has just now started to run and this is the second inning or so in a nine inning game. The NCAA is not going to apologize to anybody. It's not who they are nor is it what they do. I agree that this thing is likely to settle...just like 90% or more of all civil lawsuits.

I really don't think the paternos have any interest in anything but getting to the bottom line of what happened. I don't think they are going to settle unless the ncaa admits they were wrong.

[oujour76]

Jan 8, 2014 13:05:12 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

Jan 8, 2014 12:33:25 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

LOL. It appears to me that you have never been involved in a "civil" lawsuit. The legal meter has just now started to run and this is the second inning or so in a nine inning game. The NCAA is not going to apologize to anybody. It's not who they are nor is it what they do. I agree that this thing is likely to settle...just like 90% or more of all civil lawsuits.

I really don't think the paternos have any interest in anything but getting to the bottom line of what happened. I don't think they are going to settle unless the ncaa admits they were wrong.

We'll see.

[mscott59]

Jan 8, 2014 13:05:12 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

Jan 8, 2014 12:33:25 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

LOL. It appears to me that you have never been involved in a "civil" lawsuit. The legal meter has just now started to run and this is the second inning or so in a nine inning game. The NCAA is not going to apologize to anybody. It's not who they are nor is it what they do. I agree that this thing is likely to settle...just like 90% or more of all civil lawsuits.

I really don't think the paternos have any interest in anything but getting to the bottom line of what happened. I don't think they are going to settle unless the ncaa admits they were wrong.

perceived damage to reputation, which is what the paternos are really trying to reverse, is rectified by more than just an apology. that is, unless the apology card also contains a check. sorry...

mark scott
tosu 81

[AlaCowboy]

Jan 8, 2014 13:41:34 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

Jan 8, 2014 13:05:12 GMT -5 ihs82 said:

I really don't think the paternos have any interest in anything but getting to the bottom line of what happened. I don't think they are going to settle unless the ncaa admits they were wrong.

perceived damage to reputation, which is what the paternos are really trying to reverse, is rectified by more than just an apology. that is, unless the apology card also contains a check. sorry...

mark scott
tosu 81

If the NCAA waved a big enough check in front of the Paterno family, their greedy little fingers would be grasping it in a heartbeat. Then we would see just how much they really cared about principle, rather than principal.

[ihs82]

Feb 10, 2014 17:26:35 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Jan 8, 2014 13:41:34 GMT -5 mscott59 said:

perceived damage to reputation, which is what the paternos are really trying to reverse, is rectified by more than just an apology. that is, unless the apology card also contains a check. sorry...

mark scott
tosu 81

If the NCAA waved a big enough check in front of the Paterno family, their greedy little fingers would be grasping it in a heartbeat. Then we would see just how much they really cared about principle, rather than principal.

we'll see. i'm not going to assign incentive for the paterno estate's actions. and i think it's dumb for others to pretend that they know what they want without knowing anything about them. all i know is that the paternos said at the time they launched the lawsuit that all proceeds after their legal fees would be donated to charities that benefit child abuse.