Settle An Arguement. . . Does Paterno Estate Have Grounds For Suit?

Settle a bet between Killick and I.

Without getting into a moral debate about who was right or who was wrong and who should have done what, but does the estate of Joe Paterno have grounds to sue the university over wrongful termination? Would it win?

I am interested to see how this will come out.

 

Arguement?

 

Right now? No.

After the Sandusky trial? Possibly.

That said, methinks the last thing the Paterno family wants is to go into open court on this.

 

One of us believes they have no case and the other believes they have a case.

It was an interesting debate. I thought I'd let it carry over to SportsJournalists.com.

 

Anyone can pretty much sue for anything. Not sure if they can win though.

 

On the one hand, I think the university would have to show more than just the instance of Paterno's handling of McQueary's report to justify its action - maybe go broader and mention his handling of the matter, failure to alert higher-ups etc.
On the other hand, they could just say he didn't win enough and they were worried the program was going in the wrong direction and be perfectly within bounds. They paid off his contract (in full I believe), and I never got a sense that Penn State went out of their way to tarnish his reputation...

 

His point was that arguement isn't a word. At least not here in Amurrica.

 

Sorry for the extra "E". . . I guess I have some Canadian or something in me.

I will refer to it now as a heated debate between two stubborn individuals that makes you just want to slap the other one silly, but you can't because you are hundreds of miles away. (Lots of "E" in that phrase).

 

This sounds about right.

 

The key point in all of this is how much did Joe Pa know about Jerry the Molester. Joe Pa ain't talkin.