Online Now 1617

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 658
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 883
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

NCAA files motion to dismiss suit

  • Ok, how does the Miami case help here. Does the state amend their initial filing?

    LBU59

  • rmj147 said...

    Not necessarily, but like I said, based on the rumblings Ive heard, the judge understands how important this case is. She wont drag her feet on this... Giving her an extra 30 days should get it done sooner.

    Probably.

    GRS154

  • song46 said...

    yes, judge will decide the standing issue based on this motion. will take a few months before a ruling comes out.

    Standing will be a major issue on appeal, if there is no settlement first.

    GRS154

  • shadysidelion said...

    Is there a link to read the motion?

    sorry, i dont have a link. i downloaded it off the court system. i'm sure someone will upload it soon.

    song46

  • PSUJT0409 said...

    Not sure if I like the fact that they filed early.Either they know that it will get to court or they are convinced that the suit lacks merit or standing. We shall see.

    Most likely they just want the case to move forward more quickly than the standard pace, not that they think it's a slam dunk by any means.

    GRS154

  • LBU59 said...

    Am i correct in assuming this was inevitable?

    Yes.

    GRS154

  • rmj147 said...

    Yes. This is their only real defense. If this fails, we win essentially...

    False.... so misinformed. This is just the first bullet of many defense tactics in this case. Long way to go here, unless there's a settlement following the defense's motion being denied.

    GRS154

  • GRS154 said...

    Standing will be a major issue on appeal, if there is no settlement first.

    If it actually goes to trial (which I don't see as likely), we have a very strong case... If we win, after dragging the NCAA through the mud, I highly doubt they appeal. They could, but I doubt it. If we lose however, appeal is coming soon...

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • GRS154 said...

    False.... so misinformed. This is just the first bullet of many defense tactics in this case. Long way to go here, unless there's a settlement following the defense's motion being denied.

    What do you see as another viable defense? There really aren't many from what I understand.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • LBU59 said...

    Ok, how does the Miami case help here. Does the state amend their initial filing?

    miami case is not really relevant for this action.

    song46

  • rmj147 said...

    If it actually goes to trial (which I don't see as likely), we have a very strong case... If we win, after dragging the NCAA through the mud, I highly doubt they appeal. They could, but I doubt it. If we lose however, appeal is coming soon...

    This is off base, in my professional opinion. Trial is an unlikely outcome either way. If this gets passed the motion to dismiss stage and past the summary judgment stage, a settlement is more likely than trial. If it gets tossed by the judge from this motion to dismiss, then we'll appeal--100%. If it gets decided at the summary judgment stage before trial, an appeal is inevitable--100%. Lots more going on here than evident to the general public.

    GRS154

  • rmj147 said...

    What do you see as another viable defense? There really aren't many from what I understand.

    Just because they can't win a motion to dismiss, doesn't mean their arguments they made in that motion are dead. It has to do with the burden of proof and 12(b) standard of review. Too much to explain right now, but maybe another attorney has the time. If not, I'll try to explain later.

    GRS154

  • GRS154 said...

    This is off base, in my professional opinion. Trial is an unlikely outcome either way. If this gets passed the motion to dismiss stage and past the summary judgment stage, a settlement is more likely than trial. If it gets tossed by the judge from this motion to dismiss, then we'll appeal--100%. If it gets decided at the summary judgment stage before trial, an appeal is inevitable--100%. Lots more going on here than evident to the general public.

    The only thing different that you said is that the NCAA would appeal if it was decided at the MSJ stage before trial (which I would agree with- the idea is that the NCAA doesn't want to actually go to trial IMO). Everything else that I said you agreed with in your first 3 sentences... So what exactly was off base?

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • GRS154 said...

    This is off base, in my professional opinion. Trial is an unlikely outcome either way. If this gets passed the motion to dismiss stage and past the summary judgment stage, a settlement is more likely than trial. If it gets tossed by the judge from this motion to dismiss, then we'll appeal--100%. If it gets decided at the summary judgment stage before trial, an appeal is inevitable--100%. Lots more going on here than evident to the general public.

    i think this settles well before summary judgment. the losing party to the MTD will appeal. if pa loses, it will appeal. if NCAA loses, it will seek interlocutory appeal. if interlocutory appeal is denied, then i think the parties settle after some limited discovery.

    song46

  • GRS154 said...

    Just because they can't win a motion to dismiss, doesn't mean their arguments they made in that motion are dead. It has to do with the burden of proof and 12(b) standard of review. Too much to explain right now, but maybe another attorney has the time. If not, I'll try to explain later.

    I am an attorney and understand what you are saying. But after talking with an antitrust lawyer that practices in front of the judges that will be hearing it, in the middle district, I was told that this is the NCAA's best viable shot. Doesn't mean that they dont have other options, just not likely to succeed. Maybe I will have him email me, and copy and paste his argument for you...

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by rmj147 on 2/7/2013 at 5:26 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • song46 said...

    i think this settles well before summary judgment. the losing party to the MTD will appeal. if pa loses, it will appeal. if NCAA loses, it will seek interlocutory appeal. if interlocutory appeal is denied, then i think the parties settle after some limited discovery.

    Bingo

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • This is all part of the dog and pony show. Expected.

    There is no way Corbett and the state file this if they could lose an anti-trust suit IMO. Positive they knew this would happen, and i am very positive that they have all their ducks in a row. This isnt Snyder and Pfaltzgraf Attorneys at Law from Milton PA preparing this suit

    signature image signature image signature image

    white_out

  • rmj147 said...

    I am an attorney and understand what you are saying. But after talking with an antitrust lawyer that practices in front of the judges that will be hearing it, in the middle district, I was told that this is the NCAA's best viable shot. Doesn't mean that they dont have other options, just not likely to succeed. Maybe I will have him email me, and copy and paste his argument for you...

    I'm not an attorney... so bottom line... do we have a shot to get beyond the motion to dismiss?

    As a layman it seems the antitrust stuff is a stretch. A big argument is the economy has been damaged but in reality PSU attendance was off a little but still high up there in NCAA rankings for home attendance. All the other "economy" being damaged issues could be explained by sluggish economy, people being pissed at Paterno's treatment, bad weather, etc...

    It seems the only people who have a real case is Penn State itself in being coerced to sign the consent decree and/or Erickson not having authority to sign it. And Paternos for defemation if they have proof that the NCAA made false claims about Joe.

    Am I missing something? Please tell me I'm missing something!!!!!

    BKHPSU

  • white_out said...

    This is all part of the dog and pony show. Expected.

    There is no way Corbett and the state file this if they could lose an anti-trust suit IMO. Positive they knew this would happen, and i am very positive that they have all their ducks in a row. This isnt Snyder and Pfaltzgraf Attorneys at Law from Milton PA preparing this suit

    way off here. the filing today was expected but that's not anything new. this is just the normal process of how a suit like this works. even if they have their ducks in a row, the standing argument is anything but certain. i personally think the law is on the NCAA's side re standing but we'll see.

    song46

  • In case anyone wants to read it.

    State College, PA - NCAA Files Motion to Dismiss Gov. Corbett's Anti-Trust Lawsuit

    The NCAA does not want anyone – or the state of Pennsylvania – coming between it and the consent agreement with Penn State, which formally accepted the sanctions.

    www.statecollege.com
    signature image signature image signature image

    JettaPSU2001

  • white_out said...

    This is all part of the dog and pony show. Expected.

    There is no way Corbett and the state file this if they could lose an anti-trust suit IMO. Positive they knew this would happen, and i am very positive that they have all their ducks in a row. This isnt Snyder and Pfaltzgraf Attorneys at Law from Milton PA preparing this suit

    Disagree 100%.

    This no matter what may come out of it, is almost purely politically driven.

    signature image

    I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood what I've said.

    psu2013

  • psu2013 said...

    Disagree 100%.

    This no matter what may come out of it, is almost purely politically driven.

    This. But I am hopeful on the merits of the actual case...

    signature image signature image signature image

    WE ARE! And we will always be...

    rmj147

  • psu2013 said...

    Disagree 100%.

    This no matter what may come out of it, is almost purely politically driven.

    exactly, and if we did somehow win this case, I am guessing it will be dragged out so long that the sanctions will have, or will be near, expired, when this all gets resolved.

    This is Corbetts lame ass trying to fire his last remaining bullet. He pushed for Paternos dismisal. He didnt charge Sandusky. He said he supported the sanctions when they came out. Now this. Wouldnt hold a lot of hope here.......this is nothing more than Corbett trying to win back the vote of Penn Staters by saying he tried....

    Spulv400

  • psu2013 said...

    Disagree 100%.

    This no matter what may come out of it, is almost purely politically driven.

    Yep, but just like in the other thread Ken Fraizer did the same thing. Now he want to pretend he didn't.

    LBU59

  • song46 said...

    .....the standing argument is anything but certain. i personally think the law is on the NCAA's side re standing but we'll see.

    Song - Reacting to your opinion; The consent decree was essentially extortion. How is this viewed as truly consenting to the terms? How could this not be taken into consideration by the judge?

    RRR56