Penn State Significant Lawsuit Update, LINK!

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

The Insurance Companies and Penn State could not reach a Settlement on who will be responsible for paying for all the Lawsuits, Defenses, and Costs of The Penn State Football Scandal and have begun Court Litigation Trials. The Link below outlines what is at stake now and this has significant consequences of well over $100 million and more for Penn State's Employee Alumnus, Coach, and Professor Emeritus Crimes and Cover Ups at the University and within the FootFall Program! I only Post Updates when their is significant information that can impact on future decisions and this is the first in over a year? The outcome in this case is very important and the costs and ancillary costs will soon be approaching over $600 Million. This does not includes other Civil Lawsuits still pending as well. What Shame these Penn Staters brought to Penn State's Name! This is what happens when protecting a Football Culture Corruption becomes more important then doing the right thing and protecting Disadvantage Children? Protecting Football Program Money & Revenues is now costing Penn State University more in Money if they lose this case! The Paterno Roots Legacy that bares bitter Fruits for Penn State Name of Shame! A Settlement can still happen right up to and during the Trial that will start in March! Even if there is no Settlement the Court Ruling can be Appealed to the Supreme Court eventually only adding to the costs. When Penn State Football Culture becomes more important one pays the piper spooner later.
Article & Link:

Penn State, Insurer Scuffle Over Paying Sandusky Victims, LINK!

Penn State University is continuing to pay millions to victims in the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal, with the total payout now approaching $100 million.


But who is footing the bill for the high-price settlements? Not the university's longtime insurance provider. In fact, the university and its insurance company are suing each other in state court over the question of who should be responsible for the former assistant football coach's decades of child molestation.


As of this summer, Penn State had paid $92.8 million to settle 32 claims, according to a recently published financial audit, and university officials are expecting to settle many more.


The legal battle in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas over who should pay has a trial date scheduled for March. In the meantime, university officials say the millions already distributed came from an emergency fund generated from interest on loans the school issued to itself.


"These costs are not funded by student tuition, taxpayer funds, or donations," said Penn State spokesman L. Reidar Jensen, noting that the university bears the risk of paying for the settlements out of its emergency fund.


Jensen said he's optimistic that a jury will award Penn State all of what it spent from its reserves after a trial.


The whole tussle began when the school's insurance provider, Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Insurance Company, refused to continuously represent Penn State when the first civil lawsuit was filed in November 2011 by one of Sandusky's victims.


Penn State called that a breach of contract. The insurance company pointed to a "abuse and molestation" policy exclusion, saying that absolved it of responsibility.


It's unclear how much Penn State has paid to defend itself in court over Sandusky charges, but school officials say that, without long-term insurance-supported legal help, the university is in an "untenable" position.


A question of occurrence


In court filings, Penn State trots out the liability insurance policy that began in 1992 and highlights how coverage is supposed to begin when "bodily injury" is caused by an "occurrence" in the "coverage area," terms sure to be scrutinized at trial.


"The terms tend to be fairly general," said Temple law professor Mark Rahdert, who studies insurance disputes. "Because you can't anticipate exactly, precisely, how liability will occur, but you can anticipate a general category of how liability will occur."


But the assaults committed by Sandusky were Penn State's fault, since it happened under the "care, custody or control of PSU," according to the insurance company's filings.


In 2012, a jury convicted Sandusky of 45 counts of sexual abuse. He's now serving a minimum 30-year prison term


If anything, the insurer argues, PSU's negligence may constitute one "occurrence" each policy year, and the policy's "occurrence" payout cap is $2 million per incident.


"Both parties would rather meet in the middle," Rahdert said. "Penn State would much prefer to get $40 million than get stuck with all $90 million to cover. And the insurance would much rather get $40 million, than have to pay all $90 million. And you don't know how it's going to come out when it gets to, say, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court."


Whatever happens on the question of who should pay and how much, it will have major ramifications for this case going forward. For instance, the now-defunct kids' charity The Second Mile has also been named as a defendant in civil lawsuits filed by victims. Prosecutors said Sandusky targeted many of his victims through training camps and other programs. How much Second Mile's insurance will have to contribute toward settling cases could be informed by the Penn State court battles.


Attorney Steven Engelmyer, who is representing Penn State's insurer, wouldn't comment on the dispute. But in court filings, he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability.


"We disagree with PMA's position," said Penn State's Jensen. "Penn State has other insurance, and, as we said, we can cover expenses not paid by insurance from interest that has been and will be earned in the future on internal loans."

LINK:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/...edium=twitterauto&utm_campaign=social-inbound

 

[raleighpanther]

Captain, it would seem that this statement is key to the insurers position: "...he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability."
So, this is basically another angle on the coverup -- they kept Sandusky's activities a secret, even from their insurer. Having a known risk that you don't disclosed to an insurer relieves the insurer of having to pay.

 

[pitt-girl]

The Insurance Companies and Penn State could not reach a Settlement on who will be responsible for paying for all the Lawsuits, Defenses, and Costs of The Penn State Football Scandal and have begun Court Litigation Trials. The Link below outlines what is at stake now and this has significant consequences of well over $100 million and more for Penn State's Employee Alumnus, Coach, and Professor Emeritus Crimes and Cover Ups at the University and within the FootFall Program! I only Post Updates when their is significant information that can impact on future decisions and this is the first in over a year? The outcome in this case is very important and the costs and ancillary costs will soon be approaching over $600 Million. This does not includes other Civil Lawsuits still pending as well. What Shame these Penn Staters brought to Penn State's Name! This is what happens when protecting a Football Culture Corruption becomes more important then doing the right thing and protecting Disadvantage Children? Protecting Football Program Money & Revenues is now costing Penn State University more in Money if they lose this case! The Paterno Roots Legacy that bares bitter Fruits for Penn State Name of Shame! A Settlement can still happen right up to and during the Trial that will start in March! Even if there is no Settlement the Court Ruling can be Appealed to the Supreme Court eventually only adding to the costs. When Penn State Football Culture becomes more important one pays the piper spooner later.
Article & Link:

Penn State, Insurer Scuffle Over Paying Sandusky Victims, LINK!

Penn State University is continuing to pay millions to victims in the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal, with the total payout now approaching $100 million.


But who is footing the bill for the high-price settlements? Not the university's longtime insurance provider. In fact, the university and its insurance company are suing each other in state court over the question of who should be responsible for the former assistant football coach's decades of child molestation.


As of this summer, Penn State had paid $92.8 million to settle 32 claims, according to a recently published financial audit, and university officials are expecting to settle many more.


The legal battle in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas over who should pay has a trial date scheduled for March. In the meantime, university officials say the millions already distributed came from an emergency fund generated from interest on loans the school issued to itself.


"These costs are not funded by student tuition, taxpayer funds, or donations," said Penn State spokesman L. Reidar Jensen, noting that the university bears the risk of paying for the settlements out of its emergency fund.


Jensen said he's optimistic that a jury will award Penn State all of what it spent from its reserves after a trial.


The whole tussle began when the school's insurance provider, Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Insurance Company, refused to continuously represent Penn State when the first civil lawsuit was filed in November 2011 by one of Sandusky's victims.


Penn State called that a breach of contract. The insurance company pointed to a "abuse and molestation" policy exclusion, saying that absolved it of responsibility.


It's unclear how much Penn State has paid to defend itself in court over Sandusky charges, but school officials say that, without long-term insurance-supported legal help, the university is in an "untenable" position.


A question of occurrence


In court filings, Penn State trots out the liability insurance policy that began in 1992 and highlights how coverage is supposed to begin when "bodily injury" is caused by an "occurrence" in the "coverage area," terms sure to be scrutinized at trial.


"The terms tend to be fairly general," said Temple law professor Mark Rahdert, who studies insurance disputes. "Because you can't anticipate exactly, precisely, how liability will occur, but you can anticipate a general category of how liability will occur."


But the assaults committed by Sandusky were Penn State's fault, since it happened under the "care, custody or control of PSU," according to the insurance company's filings.


In 2012, a jury convicted Sandusky of 45 counts of sexual abuse. He's now serving a minimum 30-year prison term


If anything, the insurer argues, PSU's negligence may constitute one "occurrence" each policy year, and the policy's "occurrence" payout cap is $2 million per incident.


"Both parties would rather meet in the middle," Rahdert said. "Penn State would much prefer to get $40 million than get stuck with all $90 million to cover. And the insurance would much rather get $40 million, than have to pay all $90 million. And you don't know how it's going to come out when it gets to, say, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court."


Whatever happens on the question of who should pay and how much, it will have major ramifications for this case going forward. For instance, the now-defunct kids' charity The Second Mile has also been named as a defendant in civil lawsuits filed by victims. Prosecutors said Sandusky targeted many of his victims through training camps and other programs. How much Second Mile's insurance will have to contribute toward settling cases could be informed by the Penn State court battles.


Attorney Steven Engelmyer, who is representing Penn State's insurer, wouldn't comment on the dispute. But in court filings, he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability.


"We disagree with PMA's position," said Penn State's Jensen. "Penn State has other insurance, and, as we said, we can cover expenses not paid by insurance from interest that has been and will be earned in the future on internal loans."

LINK:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/...edium=twitterauto&utm_campaign=social-inbound

Cap'n, not a lawyer, but I thought there was precedent here with insurer liability during the fallout with the Boston Archdiocese? I'm hazy on the details, but I believe the insurer was successful in capping their financial liabilities.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Captain, it would seem that this statement is key to the insurers position: "...he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability."
So, this is basically another angle on the coverup -- they kept Sandusky's activities a secret, even from their insurer. Having a known risk that you don't disclosed to an insurer relieves the insurer of having to pay.

Exactly, and the Insurance Companies have a strong case, but they are known to settle too, and any Awards can be cut down on Appeals. I see this as way to cut some losses and come to a better result as better heads prevail over a tragic scandal that the Penn State FootFall Culture and University brought upon themselves and Shamed the Universities Name and no Award can ever upgrade that name now!

Even during the Networks and NCAA Commercials promoting College Football Traditions and History, Paterno appears in none of the Coaches Images! It was what it is and shame is in both names?

 

[USN_Panther]

The Insurance Companies and Penn State could not reach a Settlement on who will be responsible for paying for all the Lawsuits, Defenses, and Costs of The Penn State Football Scandal and have begun Court Litigation Trials.

Add insurance fraud to the list of infractions. So when they didn't notify the insurer that they knew about the Sandusky risk with the McQueary witnessed incident, this invalidated their coverage for these incidents? I guess the insurance company could have mitigated the risk exposure to civil suits by reporting crimes to law enforcement as PSU is being sued for the cover-up that put all of these victims at risk.

PSU is very eager to settle all of these cases. They are hiding something very, very bad from disclosure in discovery.

 

[mdpitt]

The Insurance Companies and Penn State could not reach a Settlement on who will be responsible for paying for all the Lawsuits, Defenses, and Costs of The Penn State Football Scandal and have begun Court Litigation Trials. The Link below outlines what is at stake now and this has significant consequences of well over $100 million and more for Penn State's Employee Alumnus, Coach, and Professor Emeritus Crimes and Cover Ups at the University and within the FootFall Program! I only Post Updates when their is significant information that can impact on future decisions and this is the first in over a year? The outcome in this case is very important and the costs and ancillary costs will soon be approaching over $600 Million. This does not includes other Civil Lawsuits still pending as well. What Shame these Penn Staters brought to Penn State's Name! This is what happens when protecting a Football Culture Corruption becomes more important then doing the right thing and protecting Disadvantage Children? Protecting Football Program Money & Revenues is now costing Penn State University more in Money if they lose this case! The Paterno Roots Legacy that bares bitter Fruits for Penn State Name of Shame! A Settlement can still happen right up to and during the Trial that will start in March! Even if there is no Settlement the Court Ruling can be Appealed to the Supreme Court eventually only adding to the costs. When Penn State Football Culture becomes more important one pays the piper spooner later.
Article & Link:

Penn State, Insurer Scuffle Over Paying Sandusky Victims, LINK!

Penn State University is continuing to pay millions to victims in the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal, with the total payout now approaching $100 million.


But who is footing the bill for the high-price settlements? Not the university's longtime insurance provider. In fact, the university and its insurance company are suing each other in state court over the question of who should be responsible for the former assistant football coach's decades of child molestation.


As of this summer, Penn State had paid $92.8 million to settle 32 claims, according to a recently published financial audit, and university officials are expecting to settle many more.


The legal battle in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas over who should pay has a trial date scheduled for March. In the meantime, university officials say the millions already distributed came from an emergency fund generated from interest on loans the school issued to itself.


"These costs are not funded by student tuition, taxpayer funds, or donations," said Penn State spokesman L. Reidar Jensen, noting that the university bears the risk of paying for the settlements out of its emergency fund.


Jensen said he's optimistic that a jury will award Penn State all of what it spent from its reserves after a trial.


The whole tussle began when the school's insurance provider, Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Insurance Company, refused to continuously represent Penn State when the first civil lawsuit was filed in November 2011 by one of Sandusky's victims.


Penn State called that a breach of contract. The insurance company pointed to a "abuse and molestation" policy exclusion, saying that absolved it of responsibility.


It's unclear how much Penn State has paid to defend itself in court over Sandusky charges, but school officials say that, without long-term insurance-supported legal help, the university is in an "untenable" position.


A question of occurrence


In court filings, Penn State trots out the liability insurance policy that began in 1992 and highlights how coverage is supposed to begin when "bodily injury" is caused by an "occurrence" in the "coverage area," terms sure to be scrutinized at trial.


"The terms tend to be fairly general," said Temple law professor Mark Rahdert, who studies insurance disputes. "Because you can't anticipate exactly, precisely, how liability will occur, but you can anticipate a general category of how liability will occur."


But the assaults committed by Sandusky were Penn State's fault, since it happened under the "care, custody or control of PSU," according to the insurance company's filings.


In 2012, a jury convicted Sandusky of 45 counts of sexual abuse. He's now serving a minimum 30-year prison term


If anything, the insurer argues, PSU's negligence may constitute one "occurrence" each policy year, and the policy's "occurrence" payout cap is $2 million per incident.


"Both parties would rather meet in the middle," Rahdert said. "Penn State would much prefer to get $40 million than get stuck with all $90 million to cover. And the insurance would much rather get $40 million, than have to pay all $90 million. And you don't know how it's going to come out when it gets to, say, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court."


Whatever happens on the question of who should pay and how much, it will have major ramifications for this case going forward. For instance, the now-defunct kids' charity The Second Mile has also been named as a defendant in civil lawsuits filed by victims. Prosecutors said Sandusky targeted many of his victims through training camps and other programs. How much Second Mile's insurance will have to contribute toward settling cases could be informed by the Penn State court battles.


Attorney Steven Engelmyer, who is representing Penn State's insurer, wouldn't comment on the dispute. But in court filings, he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability.


"We disagree with PMA's position," said Penn State's Jensen. "Penn State has other insurance, and, as we said, we can cover expenses not paid by insurance from interest that has been and will be earned in the future on internal loans."

LINK:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/...edium=twitterauto&utm_campaign=social-inbound

As bad as all this is, the $100 slush fund from interest of a loan made to itself is going to be a forensic accountant's dream investigation. Is that a loan of $1 Billion at 10% interest ? Something just doesn't add up here. Wait until a student that was denied financial aid, a straight A student and had to drop out of school files a suit. I know this sounds ridiculous but there is a lot of meat on the bone for further lawsuits and criminal charges for whoever was in charge of the slush fund. Of course they found a way for that new scoreboard, renovations, bonuses to football staff and now a new stadium?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

As bad as all this is, the $100 slush fund from interest of a loan made to itself is going to be a forensic accountant's dream investigation. Is that a loan of $1 Billion at 10% interest ? Something just doesn't add up here. Wait until a student that was denied financial aid, a straight A student and had to drop out of school files a suit. I know this sounds ridiculous but there is a lot of meat on the bone for further lawsuits and criminal charges for whoever was in charge of the slush fund. Of course they found a way for that new scoreboard, renovations, bonuses to football staff and now a new stadium?

Funny, you know your stuff, Penn State recently had Virus in their entire computer System and many things were lost during the cleaning? The money spent on this Penn State Scandal is not just $100 Million it is far bigger and some say by the time it finishes may reach Billion! Now calling losing that Info on Costs an understatement may be the True Grand Experiment Cover Ups?

This is what Happen when you Brag about having Success With honor as a Slogan and then the ones that made it up, went for a Cover UP With Dishonor, just protect the Football CULTure?

Now that is the Penn State WAYward Winds!

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Add insurance fraud to the list of infractions. So when they didn't notify the insurer that they knew about the Sandusky risk with the McQueary witnessed incident, this invalidated their coverage for these incidents? I guess the insurance company could have mitigated the risk exposure to civil suits by reporting crimes to law enforcement as PSU is being sued for the cover-up that put all of these victims at risk. PSU is very eager to settle all of these cases. They are hiding something very, very bad from disclosure in discovery.

Proving Intent within Fraud is very hard, but you hit it on the reasons for the Settlements!

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

They can easily have one of their Lawsuits dropped by making Franklin Interview Jay Paterno and the Other guy that filed a Lawsuit claiming they could not find a Job in Coaching.

In that way, Jay Interviews and is rejected but was considered or Franklin can hire him as the New OC and the Lawsuit will be dropped!

Then the Penn State Fans will file a Lawsuit Claiming neither Franklin or Paterno can coach and use the records as proof of claims of shame?

 

[JHud986]

Captain

What are the chances of this blowing up again and going public?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Captain

What are the chances of this blowing up again and going public?

Most in Power want it to go way but especially in the Judiciary but New Judges are coming in and controlling the Courts? I don't think blaming it all on Calamity Kane as Prosecutors and Judges were violating People Rights by violating alleged Ex-Parte Rules may overturn many Convictions by these same Prosecutors that were talking to Judges! The National Organization of Women is on it now, ACLU in on it too, and a whole new scandal brewing and dripping.

Some Big Domino's have fallen already and if the other Domino's start to fall and it may be just starting, Pennsylvania will end up like Illinois where some Governors, AG's, and Judges have been put in Jail and many cases and convictions overturned!

Penn State Culture of Football was built on violations of NCAA Rules, Non-Compliance's, and Laws and that cannot be erased since that has been proven. The Trustees are trying to work together now but still some trouble up there because some what more discovery and there is trouble in the Courts now.

We shall see how the Insurance Companies Versus Penn State works or settles as a tell tell sign, but a bigger explosion or implosion can happen too, based on previous mistakes made in High Places.

In all honesty, it is like Franklin's Coaching it was suppose to be better by now in hopes winning 10+ games and the Conference would make people forget and move on, but they are just madder that is not happening either?

I like to predict but I am not a witch, warlock, or fortune teller and don't practice divination except on CFB games?

 

[Pittx9]

PSU is very eager to settle all of these cases. They are hiding something very, very bad from disclosure in discovery.

Do you remember what Mark Madden said was close to being revealed about PSU/Second Mile? He may be a shock jock that will say anything, but considering their actions... it makes a lot of sense as to why things happened the way they did.

I mean really the only other scenario that could've happened I think is that Joe Pa hated Sandusky so bad he wasn't going to let him bring down Penn State football. Weird place, I guess that could've happened.

But considering Penn State acted very swiftly in removing Paterno and the others and did not look into it further. Also Second Mile losing records for 3 years and only later finding them from one of those years.... looks really, really fishy and like they knew what they were trying to protect.

 

[H2P-2007]

I wish that I could loan myself money and make interest. Wonder how that works?

I also feel that we deserve the whole story from our state university... but doubt we ever will.

 

[Pittx9]

I also feel that we deserve the whole story from our state university

I know what you mean, but I would refrain from using our when referring to that cesspool unless the words following are disgusting inbred neighbors.

 

[mdpitt]

Do you remember what Mark Madden said was close to being revealed about PSU/Second Mile? He may be a shock jock that will say anything, but considering their actions... it makes a lot of sense as to why things happened the way they did.

I mean really the only other scenario that could've happened I think is that Joe Pa hated Sandusky so bad he wasn't going to let him bring down Penn State football. Weird place, I guess that could've happened.

But considering Penn State acted very swiftly in removing Paterno and the others and did not look into it further. Also Second Mile losing records for 3 years and only later finding them from one of those years.... looks really, really fishy and like they knew what they were trying to protect.

I kind of remember what Madden said but that is "death penalty" type of stuff if true to generate cash from donors. Is that what you are suggesting? The NCAA would have to act swiftly and disband their program.

 

[Pittx9]

I kind of remember what Madden said but that is "death penalty" type of stuff if true to generate cash from donors. Is that what you are suggesting? The NCAA would have to act swiftly and disband their program.

They already should have, but clearly that would have to be the case if a school was involved with a home for at-risk youth in pimping out children to rich pedophile donors.

Maybe he isn't completely right. Maybe he is. But it's looking pretty clear that PSU and Second Mile had some relationship that involved avoiding the public finding out that Sandusky was a sick, perverted monster.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

I don't want to hijack the thread or go out to far on a tangent but in addition to second mile laundering money ( cash ) for the football program I also question the unaccounted for thousands collected by the Thon people.
Where does this money go after its collected and turned in. who and how is it accounted for and where does it go after that?? I always here about the " old duffle bags" with 20 large ending up on the kitchen table at a recruits home.
What a perfect way to raise unaccounted for cash with no possible way to trace the money.
Anyway back to the topic of the thread.

 

[DruidTM]

I'm guessing these will eventually total 107 million...new hashtag

 

[JHud986]

Captain thank you for your insight.

A question, do you feel that the insurance company(ies) have a strong case?
If (and a big if) it goes to trial will anymore information be made public?

thanks,

joe

 

[Saboteur]

Cap'n, not a lawyer, but I thought there was precedent here with insurer liability during the fallout with the Boston Archdiocese? I'm hazy on the details, but I believe the insurer was successful in capping their financial liabilities.

Massachusetts law is not PA law and it depends on the precise language of the policy and more specifically ,the exclusions from coverage.
Generally speaking, if a peril is not excluded from coverage then it is included within the coverage. Don't confuse whether peril is insured with whether the peril will be paid by the carrier. Even if it is insured, PSU still has duties in its policy (contract) to report etc....
General liability policies such as this are what are known as "occurrence" based. This means that if the policy was in effect in 1992 and the peril occurred in 1992, then in 2011 (or whenever) even if the policy was no longer in effect, it would apply.
BUTTTTT, PSU has a duty to report a claim or any act that it believes will give rise to a claim...I suspect that the carrier has a two pronged approach here.
First, challenge that the peril is even covered,
Second, assert that PSU knew and said nothing to it and thus breached the insurance contract.
Surprised it is in Phlly Common Pleas and not removed to Federal court (assuming diversity).

 

[pitt-girl]

Massachusetts law is not PA law and it depends on the precise language of the policy and more specifically ,the exclusions from coverage.
Generally speaking, if a peril is not excluded from coverage then it is included within the coverage. Don't confuse whether peril is insured with whether the peril will be paid by the carrier. Even if it is insured, PSU still has duties in its policy (contract) to report etc....
General liability policies such as this are what are known as "occurrence" based. This means that if the policy was in effect in 1992 and the peril occurred in 1992, then in 2011 (or whenever) even if the policy was no longer in effect, it would apply.
BUTTTTT, PSU has a duty to report a claim or any act that it believes will give rise to a claim...I suspect that the carrier has a two pronged approach here.
First, challenge that the peril is even covered,
Second, assert that PSU knew and said nothing to it and thus breached the insurance contract.
Surprised it is in Phlly Common Pleas and not removed to Federal court (assuming diversity).

Thanks for explaining this.

 

[Blue Goose]

haven't heard anything in a long while, but when do the 3 stooges go to trail??????????????nothing in the harrisburg patriot lately.

 

[Saboteur]

Thanks for explaining this.

You got it.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Cap'n, not a lawyer, but I thought there was precedent here with insurer liability during the fallout with the Boston Archdiocese? I'm hazy on the details, but I believe the insurer was successful in capping their financial liabilities.

It happens many times on Capping or having Awards reduced on Appeals and later Settled to avoid more time on Appeals. Funny, but there exists right now around 6,400+ Molestation Cases right now against the Vatican and I have been talking to Jesuits in Cleveland, Philly, and Chicago about them as well as Former Jesuits that are now Counselors and Psychiatrist with superb credentials and ask me about the Penn State Cases in reference to some of their own. So, I am following the Developments as well as the Back Channels on these cases more and more.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

"Pittx9, post: 584990, member: 15348"]Do you remember what Mark Madden said was close to being revealed about PSU/Second Mile? He may be a shock jock that will say anything, but considering their actions... it makes a lot of sense as to why things happened the way they did.
This is tough to respond to and it is because they never really investigated The Second Mile due to many heavy Weights associated with the Organization with deep Pockets and not implying part of any Child Porn Ring, but more like, the Red Scare of 1950s when many got shamed and hurt by just associating with Communist during WWII as Allies? Some very good people noted for Great Charity never knew what was going on, but that is why it needed to be investigated in my opinion. Additionally, The Second Mile was in every county in Pennsylvania helping and guiding many Disadvantaged Children and Penn State Football Players were part of it as expected to help charitable events. Yet, there were also NCAA Violations using PSU Player Cards, Game Tickets, and Used as Recruiting tool for Summer Camps. The Second Mile (TSM) was quickly dissolved and Funds sent to Texas and part of the Settlements with children preclude further litigation. This is where many at Penn State are not wrong to ask such questions about why TSM was given a pas by Corbett and his OAG that gave him big Campaign Money?

I mean really the only other scenario that could've happened I think is that Joe Pa hated Sandusky so bad he wasn't going to let him bring down Penn State football. Weird place, I guess that could've happened.
I have a different view here and it is just my own so not caring if anyone differs. I just think Joe Paterno was just confused on what to do when the first allegation and investigation took place in 1998? Real Men & Women just never talk about Child Porn in any form. No one even wants to think about it. If anyone brings it up, it is dismissed right away and that is the way it was at that time. Now that has changed and so have the Laws and all have to report it, but that was not the case in 1998! Joe did ask Curley & Schultz to follow the investigation and soon afterwards Sandusky retired on his own. In my opinion, Joe felt that was enough to end it all without looking into further and when knowing how no one discusses it and the Police, DPW, and DA still did not file any charges?

Yet, Spanier rewarded Sandusky with many benefits because he still felt TSM was an important part of Penn State for good Public and County Community Relations, since they operated in every County in the Commonwealth! Not any sinister cover up all just understanding it is a big part of good Penn State relations for a good cause for Decades! This is my unbiased common sense view keeping in mind the the mindset, ignorance, and confusion towards Child Molestation in 1998, not Today?

Now, once 2002 McQueary Reporting Happen is where it gets hard to believe and subsequent Emails revelations later found that discussions occurred but all agreed to avoid any formal investigation since maybe the earlier one resulted in no charges again. This due to some victims recanting their charges because Sandusky got to them, later found out, but Investigators only in 2008? Again, Hindsight while Mindsight Confusion on what to do again?

To me, the problem is still how the Investigation were conducted with so many errors that later had to be corrected, and with known selective prosecution by the Prosecutors in other unrelated investigations in the the name of political benefits for Corbett's Elections. Now that we know Prosecutors & Judges were talking and emailing each other, it has taken on a whole new problems on many prosecutions not just Sandusky and the Penn State Three?

But considering Penn State acted very swiftly in removing Paterno and the others and did not look into it further. Also Second Mile losing records for 3 years and only later finding them from one of those years.... looks really, really fishy and like they knew what they were trying to protect.
Very fair assessment, especially knowing some Heavyweight Trustees & TSM were in actual Business with Penn State University as well as the Paterno's and involved in TSM?

To me, this is where some on BWI Boards are not wrong, but then there are a few Nut Job Posters that attack everything and cannot admit anything went seriously wrong at Penn State Football or University and that is as bad as Selective Prosecutions practices that just causes more denials of true justice for personal protection of the Paterno's Program.

The simple Fact remains they ignore the Violation of NCAA Rules as well as the NCAA ignoring them as well by not investigating when they had earlier reasons to do so way back in 1996, along with Title IX/Clery Act Noncompliance, No Athletic Integrity Agreement, No Code of Conduct for Athletes, and LOIC Lack of Institutional control, and Spanier & Company got used to fending off any allegations by attacking any accusers by saying the Football Culture & Program is above reproach. This cannot be challenged since all those Reforms were put in 2012 showing they were needed and not being, and are way past the Deadlines on Public Findings that should have been released a year ago?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Captain thank you for your insight. A question, do you feel that the insurance company(ies) have a strong case? If (and a big if) it goes to trial will anymore information be made public? thanks

Politics has now impacted on all aspects of this Scandal and has spread to the Courts and tough to predict how far or when or how it ball play out now? Child Molestation Cases under Pennsylvania Law can be delayed for years.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Massachusetts law is not PA law and it depends on the precise language of the policy and more specifically ,the exclusions from coverage.
Generally speaking, if a peril is not excluded from coverage then it is included within the coverage. Don't confuse whether peril is insured with whether the peril will be paid by the carrier. Even if it is insured, PSU still has duties in its policy (contract) to report etc....
General liability policies such as this are what are known as "occurrence" based. This means that if the policy was in effect in 1992 and the peril occurred in 1992, then in 2011 (or whenever) even if the policy was no longer in effect, it would apply.
BUTTTTT, PSU has a duty to report a claim or any act that it believes will give rise to a claim...I suspect that the carrier has a two pronged approach here.
First, challenge that the peril is even covered,
Second, assert that PSU knew and said nothing to it and thus breached the insurance contract.
Surprised it is in Phlly Common Pleas and not removed to Federal court (assuming diversity).

Very good synopsis!

 

[Pittx9]

If anyone brings it up, it is dismissed right away and that is the way it was at that time.

Some fair points. But to me even if nothing happened as far as a cover-up, that was still a huge error on Paterno and the administration's fault. Yeah, if claims were made and Sandusky was found innocent, that would've really sucked for him. But I really don't think anyone should be given the benefit of the doubt in this situation.

If a claim was made that he was acting inappropriately with children, I would think anyone who is a half decent person would make sure to find out what was really going on. Clearly the potential reality of it actually happening is far more damaging then if they investigate and find that Sandusky did nothing wrong.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Pittx9, post: 588443, member: 15348"]Some fair points. But to me even if nothing happened as far as a cover-up, that was still a huge error on Paterno and the administration's fault. Yeah, if claims were made and Sandusky was found innocent, that would've really sucked for him. But I really don't think anyone should be given the benefit of the doubt in this situation.
I do not disagree with your position and it is by no means unfair in anyway. If Paterno had just stood up in 1998 and just said, I cannot accept any Distractions to our Penn State Football Program with an Investigation of one of my Coaches, and therefore, I have asked for the resignation of Coach Jerry Sandusky. Paterno would have been without a doubt a worshiped man of character. Yet, this is pure Hindsight now and in this time not 1998.

However, they had covered many things at Penn State Football Program and this kind of Paterno Statement still would have brought more scrutiny towards his Program and that may have been the reason why a quiet resignation was far more acceptable to Paterno at that time too.

Had Sandusky gone silently into the night of retirement and moved to Florida and resigned from The Second Mile too, it may have worked and no cover up would have been needed or take place in 1998 or 2002?

Yet, Spanier decided to Honor Sandusky, promote him to Professor Emeritus, and continued to allow him on Campus and sitting right in the Presidents Luxury Box? In time, that caused the unraveling if the Sandusky Retirement as well as the continued of abuse of Disadvantaged Children.

If a claim was made that he was acting inappropriately with children, I would think anyone who is a half decent person would make sure to find out what was really going on. Clearly the potential reality of it actually happening is far more damaging then if they investigate and find that Sandusky did nothing wrong.
Well, none of it worked out that way, and 14 years later, it all blew up! Now Franklin uses the Sanctions as an excuse for poor coaching?

Excuses then and more Excuses now? The Paterno's Penn State Wayward Winds or in the case of Franklin 2014-15, Penn State Program's Gone With The Wins!!!

 

[JHud986]

Bottom line is that Sandusky used ups football to recruit children to molest. ups football and administration covered it up to protect something or someone!

 

[Marshall30]

Add insurance fraud to the list of infractions. So when they didn't notify the insurer that they knew about the Sandusky risk with the McQueary witnessed incident, this invalidated their coverage for these incidents? I guess the insurance company could have mitigated the risk exposure to civil suits by reporting crimes to law enforcement as PSU is being sued for the cover-up that put all of these victims at risk.

PSU is very eager to settle all of these cases. They are hiding something very, very bad from disclosure in discovery.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Bottom line is that Sandusky used ups football to recruit children to molest. ups football and administration covered it up to protect something or someone!

Unfortunately accurate and why books will be written about it and another portending disgrace that come upon Penn State University and why it is years until they can move on, and other aspects they will not want published!

Victims cannot talk about the settlements but they can still write books about how they weer abused and what Players and Coaches did and do not do, well in the name of charity?

 

[PITTsburghFAN]

Cap'n -

Appreciate your insights on this topic. Many fear that "Penn State won" because they still play football and the wins are back, etc. But the remaining investigations are FEDERAL level and I don't believe DOJ and Dept of Education (Cleery Act) will permit child abuse to be ignored. Yes, DOJ is often politicized... and legal proceedings are brought (or ignored) accordingly. But this had too much exposure.

 

[wbrpanther]

Captain, it would seem that this statement is key to the insurers position: "...he's argued that compensating victims of Sandusky's sexual abuse is not the insurance company's problem because the university never told it of information the university had about Sandusky being a potential liability."
So, this is basically another angle on the coverup -- they kept Sandusky's activities a secret, even from their insurer. Having a known risk that you don't disclosed to an insurer relieves the insurer of having to pay.

It would seem the insurer is basically telling PedU "you knew this guy was an abuser yet you gave him free reign to prey on kids on your campus. Why should we pay the settlements". Isn't that a short way of summing it up?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Cap'n -

Appreciate your insights on this topic. Many fear that "Penn State won" because they still play football and the wins are back, etc. But the remaining investigations are FEDERAL level and I don't believe DOJ and Dept of Education (Cleery Act) will permit child abuse to be ignored. Yes, DOJ is often politicized... and legal proceedings are brought (or ignored) accordingly. But this had too much exposure.

It is Politics they will cut down some violations because there are many Loop Holes, but in the end, the Feds won't cut much funding that is what is the purpose is for Government to Fund Education.

Bottom line Penn State has already lost by any fait opinion, and the their Program has survived the worst, but will never have the cachet they tried to pretend they had to the world, that Ship did not sink after hitting the Iceberg of Shame, but it will never float right again, no one respects what happen there, and they can't change it, just have to live with it!


They made the changes needed to be in compliance but that does not mean they won anything, in fact they are paying for the losses as we speak, and will go for years. They are doing what all other Universities were doing and they were not thinking they were above the Rules & laws, but found out otherwise.

I hear you and understand what you are saying and thanks for the compliment.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

It would seem the insurer is basically telling PedU "you knew this guy was an abuser yet you gave him free reign to prey on kids on your campus. Why should we pay the settlements". Isn't that a short way of summing it up?

Pretty much, and Penn State is countering we paid you millions in fees for years! And the Insurers counter not for covering up crimes? Let the Courts decide or settle?

 

[Pittx9]

Many fear that "Penn State won" because they still play football and the wins are back, etc.

It is sickening, heartbreaking, and makes me downright have little faith in humanity anymore, but Penn State clearly won. The fact they still have a team AND as you mentioned got their wins back (not that anyone would've cared if they shut the team down though.)

It is seriously the most disgusting thing in the world that making money off of a football program is more important to what happened at that cesspool in the middle of the state. Otherwise, the NCAA would've had some balls and put the hammer down.

 

[DonP74]

It is sickening, heartbreaking, and makes me downright have little faith in humanity anymore, but Penn State clearly won. The fact they still have a team AND as you mentioned got their wins back (not that anyone would've cared if they shut the team down though.)

It is seriously the most disgusting thing in the world that making money off of a football program is more important to what happened at that cesspool in the middle of the state. Otherwise, the NCAA would've had some balls and put the hammer down.

Today my thoughts are with James. Enough ....

 

[ChazzMo]

it seems to me that this would be a wrongful act coverage claim against the university, not a CGL policy claim.

And I don't remember all the facts - but it seems to me that if some penn state official - C level staff, or chief counsel, or a board member - knowingly failed to report Sandusky's "incidents", then did that official not commit a crime? because the insurer can not only rely on the "abuse and molestation" exclusion, but wrongful acts policies usually have exclusionary language if a crime has been committed. it's usually found in with the fraud language.

I know if this was WVU (which we insure, along with all other state of WV public colleges and universities), we'd have denied coverage to Sandusky citing the abuse/molestation and the criminal act language, and probably reserved rights against the University and filed a declaratory judgment action to have the court determine coverage on the university.