ADVERTISEMENT

Alumni Trustees file petition to compel inspection of Freeh material ...

Tom McAndrew

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
56,692
40,373
1
I got notice of this earlier, but was in a meeting.

The text of their press release is below. All typos in the release are mine, as I had to key it in from what I had.

Tom



April 20, 2015 -- Penn State Alumni-Elected Trustees Edward (Ted) M. Brown III, Barbard L. Doran, Robert C. Jubelirer, Anthony P. Lubrano, Ryan J. McCombie, William F. Oldsey and Alice W. Pope today filed a Petition in The Court of Common Pleas in Centre Count to Compel Inspection of Corporate Documents pursuant to Section 5512(a) of the Pennsylvania Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988.

"Our decision to take this action comes only after repeated futile requests over many months. In fact, Trustee Lubrano first formally requested access to the Source Material in the Spring of 2013, more than two years ago." according to Bill Oldsey.

Added Lubrano, "We made a good faith effort to reach a compromise but we were simply unsuccessful. To suggest, as Chairman Masser and President Barron did yesterday in their joint statement, that we are unwilling to sign a Confidentiality Agreement is misleading and plainly untrue. We are very willing to sign an appropriate Confidentiality Agreement as the Petition filed today states. It is now time for the Court to compel the inspection of these materials that directly relate to our core duties as Trustees and to vital interests of the University. Transparency begins with the Board of Trustees."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maddog
the actual petition ...


is 25 pages long, so I'm not going to key that in.

I suspect it will be posted online somewhere, or perhaps the new message boards will allow me to attach files (I haven't a clue if it will or won't).

Tom
 
Can you at least tell us if they requested a specific judge?

:)
 
Re: the actual petition ...


Forgive my ignorance on legal issues/ IT issues, but here is my question: It is very apparent that the old guard will do anything to protect itself from the truth/full disclosure. Given that, if the elected trustees win this battle, wouldn't it be likely the old guard wouldn't turn over the damning documents that are required (taking the risk of getting caught could potentially be considered a better option for them than allowing everyone to know the truth). I understand it does depend a lot on what they are hiding, but they appear to be willing to do anything to keep the truth concealed.

Originally posted by Tom McAndrew:

is 25 pages long, so I'm not going to key that in.

I suspect it will be posted online somewhere, or perhaps the new message boards will allow me to attach files (I haven't a clue if it will or won't).

Tom
.
 
I thought about that too...

The dog ate my homework defense. "We don't have it, we can't find it, it's out being translated to Farsi, we're not getting the right feed, we forget what we did with it, we never heard of this Freeh guy, etc. etc...."
 
I would imagine that would be beyond stupid.

Wouldn't that be deliberate obstruction of justice, and could make whomever did it personally liable?
 
Re: I would imagine that would be beyond stupid.

And that disqualifies them from such action how?
 
Re: I would imagine that would be beyond stupid.

Not too mention that the documents are locked up in Pittsburgh. Pretty hard to say they don't exist or were lost.
 
This BoT isn't stupid or incompetent. They're clever, ruthless, nasty SOBs. But I don't see them getting around this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hartzie
Re: I would imagine that would be beyond stupid.

They could face jail time and be financially liable for any suit the university would automatically lose. Considering those files are also kept at an attorney office, that attorney would never go along with it. They could suffer the same fate and get disbarred.
 
The only things they've been able to get out of were when they

could buy people off with psu's money. They are now entering the phase of lawsuits with people not interested in the money. Its going to get awfully uncomfortable for the bot.
 
take a look at the Section cited in the press release ...


it's Section 5512(a) of the Pennsylvania Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988. You can access it at this link.

The text from this section is below.

Tom




§ 5512. Informational rights of a director.
(a) General rule.--To the extent reasonably related to the performance of the duties of the director, including those arising from service as a member of a committee of the board of directors, a director of a nonprofit corporation is entitled:
(1) in person or by any attorney or other agent, at any reasonable time, to inspect and copy corporate books, records and documents and, in addition, to inspect, and receive information regarding, the assets, liabilities and operations of the corporation and any subsidiaries of the corporation incorporated or otherwise organized or created under the laws of this Commonwealth that are controlled directly or indirectly by the corporation; and
(2) to demand that the corporation exercise whatever rights it may have to obtain information regarding any other subsidiaries of the corporation.
 
I think the Bismarck just got forced into Montivedo Harbor. Hopefully it's the end for the Old Guard pieces of crap.
 
This BoT isn't stupid or incompetent.

If how they've handled this entire affair doesn't qualify as incompetent, then I don't know what is. Unless of course, there was a well orchestrated conspiracy since day one, which I don't entirely rule out.
 
Re: I would imagine that would be beyond stupid.



But that is my original question: couldn't jail time and losing any suit be a better option than the world knowing what they did? It seems as though that is possible based on the lengths they are willing to go to conceal this.

An attorney such as Cynthia Baldwin isn't willing to do whatever told - seriously? she somehow hasn't been disbarred.

I understand it may seem unlikely, but given what we have seen with this entire mess, why couldn't that be a risk worth taking. Especially since there seem to be some powerful people involved.
This post was edited on 4/20 11:11 PM by Michlion
 
Posted this on FB earlier.....


but, now that it's officially "ON"...its worth a repost:

"Wound my heart with a monotonous languor" The elected trustees have signaled that the battleships are loaded and moving across the Channel. A day not to pop the champagne, but a day to grab your gun. It is time to fight like never before. The offensive stage of the battle is just beginning...but it IS beginning.

Yes, I realize its on a minute scale relative to the invasion of Europe...but the feeling is the same - in that in each case thousands of people have been waiting for years to see the turning of the tide.

As the tide - hopefully - turns (and we need to keep in mind this is just a first step in a long journey, with many potential pitfalls), we need to remember:

"If we don't change the way the PSU BOT is composed.....we have all failed. And PSU will fail again and again."

If the PSU BOT structure is not reformed - even if this battle is won - we will be fated to fight similar battles again and again in the future. If we are to ever truly "win", this unaccountable cabal must be demolished, and a new engaged structure erected in its place.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by nits74:
This BoT isn't stupid or incompetent.

If how they've handled this entire affair doesn't qualify as incompetent, then I don't know what is. Unless of course, there was a well orchestrated conspiracy since day one, which I don't entirely rule out.
These guys remind me of the Godfather....corruption, stealing, mistresses. They aren't stupid, but ruthless.
 
I see the BoT is also going after some victims financial records. They should have done this from the beginning, now the cornered rats seek another way out. The BoT is trying to hide that "victims" were improperly or not vetted at all.
 
Anyone know why Lord is not part of this lawsuit?

My understanding is that some members of the power bloc were using the fact that he's paying for some aspects of Spanier's defense against him -- claiming it was a conflict of interest. Seems like a weak argument to me. However, Lord and the other alumni-elected trustees decided to eliminate the distraction/avenue of attack by not having him as a party to the lawsuit.
 
to have the documents releasted. From a legality standpoint, what does a petition do? Is it something that a judge has to rule on? Is it binding? Is it appealable? Sorry for the ignorance on this matter.
 
to have the documents releasted. From a legality standpoint, what does a petition do? Is it something that a judge has to rule on?

It's filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County. A judge will have to rule on it. If he rules in favor of the plaintiffs, then the documents will have to be provided to the alumni-elected trustees.

Is it binding?

All legal rulings are binding, unless they are overturned on appeal, or placed on hold due to appeal.

Is it appealable?

Pretty much every legal ruling is appealable, with the exception of those issued by the full Supreme Court of the US.

Tom
 
Its amazing how the power bloc fight to not be transparent, and at the same time how little they fight for Penn State University. They are very dirty evil human beings and so sick of them getting away with it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT