Looks like Jay and the estate filed against the NCAA for, basically, stonewalling on answers after repeated attempts.
New filing, Paterno vs Emmertt/NCAA/PSU
- Thread starter Obliviax
- Start date
Would love the legal eagles of the board to weigh in here... this sounds very compelling but what do I know? Any learned opinions on whether or not the Paterno's arguments are as valid as the filing makes it sound?
They have moved for judgment on the pleadings, saying, in effect, that the NCAA has admitted everything which the NCAA denied with one word denials when it answered the 2d amended complaint.
For about a third of the allegations in the 2d amended complaint, the NCAA simply answered with a one-word denial: "Denied." Well, it turns out under PA law an answer must deny with specificity the matter asserted. General denials have the same effect as an admission.
The filing basically says that since NCAA has admitted a third of the stuff in the complaint straight up, the Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment in their favor on certain issues. Not sure how much chance of success it has, but it is proof that Wink, et al are pushing the craven hosebags on the other side.
NCAA's PA counsel has no doubt received some grief from the top dog lawyers in the case for this. Just not sure how much legs this has, or whether the court will just order them to file a more complete answer.
PA lawyers on the board? Does this have a chance?
let's wait for CDW to weigh in, then understand the opposite of what he opines is true 
All fact allegations are admitted by a general denial The question is whether the admitted facts prove plaintiff's cause of action. I don't want to do that work but you can if you'd like.
IMO the court will not give defendants another chance to plead. Since this is such a basic rule of pleading, I'm shocked counsel did it. I can't ever remember seeing it in pleadings except where an attorney was new and didn't know what they were doing. That does not appear to be the case here.
Could this be the NCAA throwing in the towel and giving up but in return not having to give more depositions? I know the paternos are not willing to settle without pretty much a full apology from the NCAA but what happens if the towel gets thrown in? This could be the NCAAs out possibly
That seems to be exactly what is going on here. The NCAA is a billion dollar "corporation" that basically has unlimited funds to deal with litigation. The Paternos, for as wealthy and well supported as they are, pale in comparison. They are trying to bleed them dry, which is extremely common for large corporations in legal battles with individuals. I suspect the Paternos will get what they want at the end of the day from all this, but it will cost them 10x what it would have if the NCAA wasn't playing these games. It's how the civil legal system works though. We can only hope that at some point the judge calls them on it and moves things forward or at least starts penalizing them for tactics like this. They can only plead ignorance so many times.
I agree. Their lawyers are too good to do this in error. Therefore, they did it on purpose. I suspect they know in the end they will lose. By making this major "blunder" they lose without having to give out any more information. The bad news is if the Judge rules in the Paterno's favor, no more truth will be found through this door. That sucks.
Not a delay tactic, just sheer, stunning incompetence by the NCAA's local PA counsel. It will be interesting to see what the court does here. Ignorance of the rules of pleading is no excuse for a represented party.
Have to agree. 1) they aren't going to rule in favor of Paternos for something so minuscule and b) this isn't the kind of case there pissing off the judge means much. the judge knows that eyes are on him/her and won't rule lightly either way.
kind of reminds me what Merck did to the victims of Vioxx . . .
But would the Paterno's pursue a course of action that could ultimately lead to suppression of information?
That's a great point. Its could be like pleading "no contest" as opposed to pleading guilty. When you know you cannot win, it still gives you options (in other potential cases) down the road and it allows you to "spin" it, for PR purposes.
I agree. I'm completely lost- the Paternos file a motion but the NCAA is delaying trying to stall but it's a minor thing except if the Paternos win the NCAA gets out of depositions??? Can someone give a simple summary please.
If I understand it correctly, the NCAA responded to several requests as "denied". In the state of PA, that is considered uncool and also is considered a surrender on the facts. As such, those issues responded to as "denied" are, in affect, awarded to the other side.I agree. I'm completely lost- the Paternos file a motion but the NCAA is delaying trying to stall but it's a minor thing except if the Paternos win the NCAA gets out of depositions??? Can someone give a simple summary please.
The attorneys are saying this is a fundamental error only a first year lawyer would make. It is so eggregious, it makes one wonder if there is an alterior motive.
That motive, it is being speculated, is that the NCAA is throwing in the flag without admitting to being guilty. This would allow them to lose the case, on what could be called a technicality and NOT the merits of the case, pay up, position themselves to fight additional potential law suits and spin it to the press that they didn't do anything wrong.
That's a very big potential payout to make, and the Paterno's get to spin it as a total and complete victory very early in the game.
I think--as 7113 said--it is an egregious error by local counsel. In the state where I practice you can still use "denied" in your answer and that suffices to preserve the argument about whether it is true or not until later. I suspect counsel from the foreign jurisdiction prepared the answer using his own local pleading rules, then passed it by PA counsel for review and that guy dropped the ball. What would have been perfectly fine in Indiana or wherever is a disaster in PA.
Understand even the Paternos admit that this will not end the case. Assuming the NCAA has technically admitted the falsity of the statements it or others made about Jay and Kenny, and the judge rules that way, they still have to have depositions about the nature of the NCAA's knowledge of the facts and the remedy for this injustice. It is a shocking event if the court grants the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, but the case is not over, and the depos will take place anyway.
Last edited:
But do the admitted facts prove plaintiff's cause of action? Even with the deemed admissions the plaintiffs still might have to prove contested facts in order to prevail.
Deciding that's the job of the guy with the long black dress.
Dem - Thanks for weighing in on this. I gave it a quick read (and will likely go over it in more detail later on) but this is an issue - IMHO - where it is really helpful to hear from someone who has training and experience in the legal world.
Great stuff, Dem!! IMHO, the depositions are critical to the truth path. However, I don't think discovery from NCAA types is enough unless it opens up the discovery door for PSU exces and the BoT. Can the Paternos readily get there via NCAA discovery. TIA.
NCAA responds that the paternos only want money from this. Gold, Jerry, gold.
Somewhere, in an alternate universe, is a governing body of amateur athletics, and they are not evil. Or stupid.
But, ummmmm....not here.
But, ummmmm....not here.
Then the NCAA is unaware of the Paternos' statement saying the net proceeds of any award they may receive will be donated to charity. As they said from the beginning, their main goal is to find the truth. They have no interest in making a profit.
As Salome wanted John the Baptist's head so the Paterno's want truth justice and Emmert's head.
The Paterno's need to keep proclaiming the mantra publicly:
All money goes to charity.
All money goes to charity.
All money goes to charity.
Let the NCAA continue to look stupid.
All money goes to charity.
All money goes to charity.
All money goes to charity.
Let the NCAA continue to look stupid.
The problem is that Don Remy and Mark Emmert are lying sacks of human waste, so they believe that everyone else is, too.
Doesn't matter. Say it to the media, loud and often. The message will get delivered, and if Jay delivers it, he will do so quite eloquently.
I believe that you would still have to take Kenny F's (and the others') depos to just explore the remote possibility that they might have "coordinated" with the NCAA like they did with Freeh. Understand, once Freeh said PSU FB was guilty we were largely screwed, but then the NCAA doubled down 11 days later. Even the most casual college FB fan, even people who just like colleges in general without liking college sports at all, EVEN people who know nothing about any of it, know the NCAA's name* and generally that they do not get involved unless these folks are REALLY cheaters.
The so-called "independence" of the Freeh Report and the NCAA sanctions made it seem like these were results that each organization had reached independently. It doubled or tripled the effect, especially when every clown with a pulse knows who the NCAA is, and nobody knows Freeh from Adam.
Now, the naysayers here will claim that this case is about defamation of Jay and Kenney and other things, not about the rep of PSU. True, but as the rep of PSU FB went down the toilet, so did Jay's and Kenney's.
*The only people on earth who this did not harm PSU's rep with are those who think the NCAA and the NAACP are the same organization.
No the NCAA's lawyers are not that good. Just because one has money, does not mean it knows what it's doing. Case in point from the attorney for the NCAA. "We never threatened them with the death penalty, they just couldn't play football on Saturdays." Sorry, but that statement pulled the drain plug on their ship. They are not very bright at all.
For an organization like the ncaa to insult the Paternos shows that they know they're toast.
And as further proof the NCAA attorneys aren't very bright, it was they who made the consent decree and issue in the Corman suit. Had they not done so the results may have been different. Thank you NCAA for hiring stupid lawyers.
they're not stupid. the NCAA has paid them millions to sit at the card table with a Jack high hand and try to bluff the Paternos, who are holding a straight flush. only so much they can do with such crappy cards
I will believe you when a PA lawyer comes on here and tells us that this is typical practice--to make general denials and the other side calls you on it and the judge simply wont enforce the letter of the rule, or that having seen that too many times, the PA counsel is relying on the idea that the rule is never enforced as written.
But those who have spoken to it say that is the rule and they would expect it to be enforced. To me that means PA counsel tried a fair catch at his own two and fumbled it.
I just think their shady tactics are less a product of incompetence, and more a product of knowing what a sh*t case they have and trying to squeak out any possible defense they can
