Spanier files emergency motion to intervene in the McQueary lawsuit
- Thread starter LundyPSU
- Start date
LundyPSU, ring the stadium cowbell for a round table meeting of the B/W board's attorneys....
we need some pro bono professional translation
Im guessing this was filed because Spaniers team doesnt want whatever b.s. Baldwin is going to spew in her deposition for the MM suit released to the public thus further tainting the jury pool.
Also AcP re:baldwin is still not resolved with an appeal in process.
That was my take on the Curley/Schultz filing and is on this one as well. If they stand idly by and allow Baldwin to say whatever she wants in the MM depo and don't scream ACP then they could be accused by the state of essentially waiving ACP with Baldwin rendering their ACP claims in their own proceedings moot. That's just one engineer's take. I could be wrong.
Schultz filed a writ of summons against Baldwin back in December in 2012. There's been nothing in that case on the centre county website since. I think it just means Schultz reserves the right to file a civil suit once his criminal case is complete.
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SCHULTZ VS BALDWIN WRIT OF SUMMONS.pdf
I'm unaware of anything from Curley, or anything else from Schultz.
Since the indictments:
Arab Spring
Barry Bonds Sentenced
Bombing Attacks in Nigeria
WikiLeaks discloses 5 Million e-mails (Where's Louis?)
26 Massacred in Connecticut elementary school
Civil War in Syria
Pope Benedict resigns
Boston Marathon bombers
Ebola Outbreak
Shooting death in Ferguson MO
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370....239 lost
ISIS rises to power
And - still - no trial for CSS.
Since the indictments:
You should also note besides the bombing in Boston that there was a trail and a conviction. CSS is being slow played because the judge and the state won't fork over the discovery. They aren't sending it over because they don't want the trial to start because they probably don't have a case and if they admitted that that will undermine some of the Sandusky testimony.
Just guessing but the state does not want any testimony from CSS to get to Sandusky's lawyer that would allow for a retrial. I am not stating that I think Sandusky is innocent although some of the charges and convictions seem to be a stretch. I don'y think the State wants any negative info out regarding the conviction even if it is limited to a couple of the convictions. Police lying, convictions without identifying victims and similar situations will be more difficult to deal with if CSS are free of their charges and can openly testify or be deposed.
Arab Spring
Barry Bonds Sentenced
Bombing Attacks in Nigeria
WikiLeaks discloses 5 Million e-mails (Where's Louis?)
26 Massacred in Connecticut elementary school
Civil War in Syria
Pope Benedict resigns
Boston Marathon bombers
Ebola Outbreak
Shooting death in Ferguson MO
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370....239 lost
ISIS rises to power
And - still - no trial for CSS.
What the hell is the point of posting this in every thread you want to follow? Just click on it when there are new replies
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
Looking to suppress her statements pending the appeal of Hoover's AcP decision scheduled to be heard by Commonwealth Supreme Court on August 11. I'd be shocked if Hoover's decision were to be reversed.
Also, why are Baldwins conversations with CSS NOT considered ACP when she was supposedly acting as their attorney through the University (only attorneys allowed in Grand Jury room, and she WAS present) yet Louis Freeh's conversations with just about everyone in the role as "consultant" ARE considered ACP? Louis wasn't hired as an attorney, so how can ACP apply?
Anxiously awaiting your answer 66.
Just looking at the filing. Interesting that Spanier is not asking for the deposition to be delayed. Instead, wants his lawyer to be present at deposition to (1) limit deposition to non-privileged info., (2) assert client-attorney privilege on Spanier's behalf, and (3) if Spanier's lawyer objects to questions claiming attorney-client privilege, Baldwin not to answer. Assume that Curley and Schultz filed similar requests.
66 can answer for himself, but I believe this went out the window when Penn State waived privilege for Baldwin. I don't get the Louis Freeh argument either. Guess that is why the last Sandusky "victim" was granted access to Freeh files and PSU quickly settled.
Last edited:
How is that the university's decision to make though? The university wasn't charged. Three individuals were. Its a farce if that's the case and quite frankly a blatant stripping of ones constitutional rights.
Exactly. It still blows my mind that in feudales chambers baldwin told fina and feudale that she was only representing Psu and not CSS individualy then right after that CSS identified baldwin as THEIR counsel in open court on the record and none of fina, feudale, or baldwin felt the need and professional responsibility to correct them and inform them baldwin wasn't representing them individually. How in the eff did baldwin/fina/feudale not get disciplined/disbarred over that???? Talk about misconduct!!
Also, as you mentioned, if that was the case then she never should have even been in the court room.
Gotta love that good ol' PA judicial system!!
Spanier filed a nearly identical motion to intervene in the V9 vs. PSU lawsuit when Baldwin was scheduled for a deposition to be held on 4/10/2015. His motion was filed on 3/23/2015 and was granted just a week later.
However, based on letters between the lawyers (that were included as exhibits in that filing) PSU was still on the hook to provide a lot of Freeh related materials to V9. The PSU BOT held an emergency meeting one day before these materials were due. They voted to approve additional victim settlements. The V9 docket sheet showed his case as entering settlement negotiations the very next day, the day PSU was on the hook to provide Freeh related materials. You can read more about that, and see copies of the letters between the lawyers here: https://jmmyw.wordpress.com/2015/04...ate-board-approve-settlements-april-9th-2005/
If MM can similarly get legal access to those Freeh materials, I would expect his case to enter settlement shortly thereafter.
And just as an aside - PSU stopped listing and summarizing the costs of the scandal so there is no easy way to infer how much they will have paid V9 (my guess is certainly more than the $3M others received, likely well into the 8 figures). The cost summary used to be on FAQ page which has since disappeared from the PSU website. I think the last time they had updated it was a year ago.
And here is the docket sheet from the V9 case showing Spanier's motion to intervene and that is was granted a week later:
However, based on letters between the lawyers (that were included as exhibits in that filing) PSU was still on the hook to provide a lot of Freeh related materials to V9. The PSU BOT held an emergency meeting one day before these materials were due. They voted to approve additional victim settlements. The V9 docket sheet showed his case as entering settlement negotiations the very next day, the day PSU was on the hook to provide Freeh related materials. You can read more about that, and see copies of the letters between the lawyers here: https://jmmyw.wordpress.com/2015/04...ate-board-approve-settlements-april-9th-2005/
If MM can similarly get legal access to those Freeh materials, I would expect his case to enter settlement shortly thereafter.
And just as an aside - PSU stopped listing and summarizing the costs of the scandal so there is no easy way to infer how much they will have paid V9 (my guess is certainly more than the $3M others received, likely well into the 8 figures). The cost summary used to be on FAQ page which has since disappeared from the PSU website. I think the last time they had updated it was a year ago.
And here is the docket sheet from the V9 case showing Spanier's motion to intervene and that is was granted a week later:
Last edited:
I'd be shocked if Hoover's decision weren't reversed.
-----
Spanier's Superior Court docket sheet (304 MDA 2015) shows some interesting developments:
https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/Appellate.aspx
First, the next event in the case is oral arguments scheduled for 8/11/2015.
Prior to that scheduling, an Amicus Curiae Brief from the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys was filed on 5/27/2015. The PACDL website indicates they filed similar briefs for each of Curley, Schultz, and Spanier. There is a link to Schultz's brief on their website. It's quite critical of Hoover's decision on 1/14/2015, and on Baldwin's actions. It's also critical of Judge Feudale and the prosecutors at the grand jury.
PACDL June 2015 news of amicus briefs: http://myemail.constantcontact.com/PACDL-News.html?soid=1104983095176&aid=aAVf-xIMR9s
Link to Schultz's amicus brief: http://files.ctctcdn.com/887ff164101/171a11e5-ecae-4c57-9e3c-148d2a91f208.pdf (there were no links to Curley or Spanier's briefs, but I'm guessing they're largely the same)
And, on 5/19/2015 Jeff Wall, Brent McIntosh, and Judson Littleton of Sullivan & Cromwell were added to Spanier's legal team. Jeff Wall heads his firm's appellate litigation practice. He is notable for being the youngest lawyer to have argued 10 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
https://www.sullcrom.com/lawyers/JeffreyB-Wall
-----
Spanier's Superior Court docket sheet (304 MDA 2015) shows some interesting developments:
https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/Appellate.aspx
First, the next event in the case is oral arguments scheduled for 8/11/2015.
Prior to that scheduling, an Amicus Curiae Brief from the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys was filed on 5/27/2015. The PACDL website indicates they filed similar briefs for each of Curley, Schultz, and Spanier. There is a link to Schultz's brief on their website. It's quite critical of Hoover's decision on 1/14/2015, and on Baldwin's actions. It's also critical of Judge Feudale and the prosecutors at the grand jury.
PACDL June 2015 news of amicus briefs: http://myemail.constantcontact.com/PACDL-News.html?soid=1104983095176&aid=aAVf-xIMR9s
Link to Schultz's amicus brief: http://files.ctctcdn.com/887ff164101/171a11e5-ecae-4c57-9e3c-148d2a91f208.pdf (there were no links to Curley or Spanier's briefs, but I'm guessing they're largely the same)
And, on 5/19/2015 Jeff Wall, Brent McIntosh, and Judson Littleton of Sullivan & Cromwell were added to Spanier's legal team. Jeff Wall heads his firm's appellate litigation practice. He is notable for being the youngest lawyer to have argued 10 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
https://www.sullcrom.com/lawyers/JeffreyB-Wall
Thanks for all of the logically ordered and useful information.
"I'd be shocked if Hoover's decision weren't reversed."
Shocked, mystified, gobsmacked and really curious concerning the ruling.
A big THANK YOU to JimmyW. Always appreciate Jimmy's posts. Very informative, and he clearly is up to date on so much of what has transpired.
amazing how much more credible he is, more logical, more well versed in the law . . . than the bogus attorney wannabes who are constantly smearing Paterno . . .
What we need is for the truth to come out, and for the innocent to be absolved.
Any chance off the radar deep pockets are helping to finance the CSS cases as they are allegedly helping the Paternos?
the deepest pockets are financing the Curley and Schultz ( I don't know about GS) that being PSU, they are paying for their defense, and who has deeper pockets???
Not necessary. PSU is footing the bill for their criminal case. Spanier is paying for his civil case against Freeh. I think Al Lord is helping him in that one. Don't know if anyone else is.
I don't think anybody who is innocent should fear any legal proceedings actually making it into a courtroom. In fact, given how so many people have been dragged thru the mud on this whole thing, including Mike, those that are truly innocent should welcome the opportunity to tell their sides of the story, and to face cross-examination. I'm sure we both agree on that.
Similar threads
