RE: ESPN article: psu sanctions were mark emmert's "waterloo moment"
In summary,:
The NCAA filed and argued that Penn State is an Indispensable party to any lawsuit and since it is not part of this Lawsuit therefore Commonwealth Courts have no jurisdiction and asked it be dismissed.
NCAA argued, that Penn State signed the Consent Decree and the Paterno's Et Al have no right to void a Contract they are not part of either.
NCAA argued, that Penn State by signing the Consent Decree agreed to avoiding a protracted investigation, achieved an expedited Enforcement Process and avoided the Death Penalty.
NCAA argued, that the Paterno's Et Al are challenging the Autonomy of Penn State and lack the authority to do so.
NCAA argued, that the Paterno's Et Al lack Standing because they are nor parties of Penn State membership in the NCAA.
NCAA argued, there are no Procedural Rights for Penn State Trustees, Former Players, Head & Assistant Coaches or Faculty to Appeal any NCAA Sanctions and never involved these individuals with sanctions by NCAA By Laws.
NCAA argued, that Joseph Vincent Paterno cannot be an involved individual because he passed away months before the Freeh Report was even released, accepted by Penn State and before the sanctions were ever imposed.
NCAA argued, the vacated wins are sanctions against the University not against individuals or coaches.
NCAA argued, Al Clemens that was a Trustees during the time of the Freeh report and subsequent Sanctions is not involved individual since he is not cited in the Consent Decree and was not subject to any sanctions.
NCAA Argued, the Paterno's Et Al, can only enforce promises to there benefit but even in their Complaint cited no actual By-Laws they seek to enforce, and there alleged NCAA Procedural Rules By-Laws only Penn State has vested.
The NCAA then argued on Counts I & II, the Paterno's Et Al are not Third Party Beneficiaries of Penn State's Consent Decree they alleged have been breached, and lack Standing to bring such a Cause of Actions.
The NCAA went on to argue, that Paterno's Et Al request to void the NCAA Consent Decree with Penn State is baseless, lacks standing and cannot show injuries to them, and are strangers that imposes no contractual terms on them. Even if the NCAA did owe Due Process Rights under the By-Laws, "(Which They Did Not)" the entire breach would not invalidate the entire Consent Decree. Paterno's Et Al did not alleged that the Consent Decree violated any laws.
NCAA argued, on Paterno's Et All Defamation Complaint, fails for three reasons.
A. None of the alleged defamatory statements even mentions any of the Paternos' Et al Plaintiffs. The Alleged Defamatory Statements apply to the Penn State Community At Large for which, no cause of actions can be applied, not any Plaintiffs.
B. NCAA Statements were opinions based on Freeh Report Facts disclosed by Penn State.
C. The Paterno's Et Al claims of Defamation shows the NCAA acted with NO actual Intent of Malice because the Paterno's Et Al are Public Figures. This included all Former Players, Former and Current Trustees, Assistant Coaches, Faculty, and the Paterno's that all signed the complaint.
NCAA argued, none of the Paterno's Et Al can show that the NCAA knew or recklessly DISREGARDED the truth relying on the Freeh Report that was commissioned and adopted by Penn State which, is not a Party of this Lawsuit.
NCAA argued that Paterno's Estate and Family claims for Commercial Disparagements is without any allegations that make any sense, lacks commercial interests identification, or goods and services identified by the estate, show any losses, or financial losses from the Consent Decree publication. Joe Paterno died before the Freeh Report and Consent Decree and Paterno's Family cannot show any understandable Losses since they showed no Commercial Interests that survived his death, harmed after his death, that diminished within the Consent Decree whatsoever.
NCAA argued that Jay Paterno and William Kenney that the Consent Decree caused them from being employed at universities without providing any proof, material facts, and show any damage to any other prospective contracts or opportunities that involves the NCAA activities at all.
NCAA said, even if the NCAA intended with any contract the NCAA actions on imposing sanctions with Penn State are within NCAA rules and not improper.
Paterno's Et Al claim of a Civil Conspiracy cannot be established by any facts or even allegations and such a claim did not exist.
NCAA argued, Paterno's cannot establish any jurisdiction over on material facts to show or NCAA Emment and Ray maintain regular continuous contacts in Pennsylvania at the time the process was served and thus has no jurisdiction and Paterno's claims that the NCAA did not follow their By-Laws and deny Paterno's Et All their Rights are not adequate to prove personal jurisdiction of Emment and Ray.
The NCAA added Exhibits 1 and 2 with Emment and Ray proving they never resided or have any attachments to Pennsylvania whatsoever and signed them under oath to prove there could be no Civil Conspiracy ORJURISDICTION.
My thoughts are the psu et al lawsuits are red herrings.
|
/
ESPN article: psu sanctions were mark emmert's "waterloo moment"
