The push-and-pull of legal filings between Graham Spanier and Louis Freeh continues in the United States Court of Appeals this week.
Since former Penn State President Graham Spanier announced his intention to sue investigator Louis Freeh for defamation last year, Spanier and Freeh have been going back and forth in a game of legal tug-of-war over when and where the case should be heard.
Spanier, who filed the suit in Centre County Court, asked a state judge to delay the case until a decision is made on his criminal trial. Prosecutors claim Spanier played a role in covering up the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal.
The court agreed, finding that Spanier’s right not to incriminate himself before his trial outweighs Freeh’s attempts to move the defamation lawsuit to federal court.
Freeh and his law firm — Freeh, Sporkin and Sullivan, LLC — have argued that since they are not based in Pennsylvania, the lawsuit should be heard by a federal judge. However, there is a one year time limit to move the case to federal jurisdiction, and Freeh fears his time to exercise that right is running out.
Freeh appealed a decision to stay the lawsuit to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, which found it did not have jurisdiction to make a decision. The debate has since found its way to the United States Court of Appeals.
On October 10, Spanier filed a request with the federal appeals court for “summary affirmance.” This is a legal request that argues a decision can be made on the basis of paper work and previous rulings without the need for a hearing. Spanier’s documents requesting summary affirmance are sealed.
Freeh is continuing his fight to have the case heard in federal court, and filed documents earlier this week requesting the appeals court deny Spanier’s request. Freeh argues in this latest filing that the debate over the lawsuit’s proper jurisdiction is too important and complex to be decided without a proper hearing.
“Because this appeal presents a substantial question that requires a full appellate review by this Court, Spanier’s motion to summarily affirm… should be denied,” the filing reads.
No trial date has been set in Spanier’s criminal case. Two others are also charged in the alleged cover-up — former Athletic Director Tim Curley and former Senior Vice President for Finance Gary Schultz. All three men have pleaded not guilty and promise to vigorously defend themselves in court.
POPULAR STORIES:
HUB Shooting Threat Suspect, Dorm Assault Suspect, Both Waive Preliminary Hearings
Court Ignores NCAA Requests for Quick Ruling, Grants Extension
State High Project Receives $2 Million Grant to Go Green
Police Report: Man Exposes Himself in Walmart Parking Lot
Construction Crews Begin Work on Long-Delayed Fraser Centre
