Legal Ruling wrt PSU Board of Trustees

PSUFTG

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2021
1,381
2,092
113
Judge: Penn State must pay legal defense bills of trustee under internal investigation.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.

"A Lackawanna County Court judge ruled Penn State must pay a trustee's legal fees in defending himself against an internal investigation by the university.

PSU's bylaws require that the college cover legal fees of a trustee who comes under investigation, even if the probe is by the university, according to the decision reached Monday by Judge James Gibbons. In documents and proceedings, trustee Anthony Lubrano claimed the investigation is “retaliation” for his Feb. 16 resolution to rename the football field at Beaver Stadium for former football coach Joe Paterno and his wife, Sue, as well as Lubrano's comments afterward to media about PSU tuition and capital projects.

On March 28, trustee leaders reprimanded Lubrano for presenting the Paterno resolution and for his comments. The board in March began an investigation of Lubrano based on anonymous complaints from other trustees regarding the resolution and his public comments. Lubrano, of Glenmoore, Chester County, was first advised of the investigation July 18. Four days later, he requested indemnification and advancement of expenses.

PSU denied the request Aug. 7. On Aug. 25, the board gave notice of an executive session scheduled for Sept. 6 regarding the investigation. Lubrano then filed on Sept. 4 an emergency petition for a temporary injunction to pause the probe until PSU advances expenses to him so he can pay his legal bills incurred so far in the matter, as well as his future legal bills in the case.
Lubrano contended the university bylaws are a contract that provide both indemnification and advance of expenses to trustees who come under investigation. PSU disagreed and denied the request, but offered to advance $10,000 for his expenses, which Lubrano rejected.

Gibbons on Sept. 5 issued a temporary injunction and heard the case Sept. 12. Lubrano's legal bills had amounted to $140,000 from July 18 to Sept. 7. It's not clear how much has been incurred since.

Gibbons' ruling sides with Lubrano and keeps the investigation halted until PSU advances his expenses “as required by the bylaws." The order directs Lubrano to present his bills to the university as they are incurred. The nature of the investigation remains confidential but has been characterized in court proceedings as Lubrano having supposedly violated his fiduciary duty to PSU as a trustee. But the crux of the probe is not germane to the issues at hand in the injunction, which include: whether PSU is obligated to advance Lubrano's expenses in connection with its investigation of him; and whether he is entitled to have the probe halted until PSU pays his legal fees.

PSU argued Lubrano could afford to pay his own legal fees and expressed concern about the university having to issue a “blank check” to him, especially as appeals could ensue for some time. Gibbons determined the bylaws do not contain any means test and do not define reasonableness of expenses or limit them. Rather, the bylaws are “straightforward and mandatory,” in dictating that every trustee “shall be entitled as of right to have his expenses in defending any action paid in advance by the university, as incurred.”

PSU's attorney also referred to Lubrano as a “defendant” in the investigation and cited an exception for covering fees of defendants. But Gibbons noted Lubrano has not been charged with anything in the matter and is not a “defendant." The judge called the terminology a “thinly veiled attempt” by PSU to avoid advancing fees as required under its bylaws. PSU's reading of its own bylaws is “strained and contrived,” the judge ruled.

PSU also argued “no public interest is served” by an injunction in the university's investigation of complaints raised about a trustee. Gibbons rejected that notion, too, noting PSU was created in 1855 by an act of the state Legislature, and as a state university, PSU is partly supported by taxpayer funds.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.
 

Bwifan

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,341
2,509
113
Judge: Penn State must pay legal defense bills of trustee under internal investigation.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.

"A Lackawanna County Court judge ruled Penn State must pay a trustee's legal fees in defending himself against an internal investigation by the university.

PSU's bylaws require that the college cover legal fees of a trustee who comes under investigation, even if the probe is by the university, according to the decision reached Monday by Judge James Gibbons. In documents and proceedings, trustee Anthony Lubrano claimed the investigation is “retaliation” for his Feb. 16 resolution to rename the football field at Beaver Stadium for former football coach Joe Paterno and his wife, Sue, as well as Lubrano's comments afterward to media about PSU tuition and capital projects.

On March 28, trustee leaders reprimanded Lubrano for presenting the Paterno resolution and for his comments. The board in March began an investigation of Lubrano based on anonymous complaints from other trustees regarding the resolution and his public comments. Lubrano, of Glenmoore, Chester County, was first advised of the investigation July 18. Four days later, he requested indemnification and advancement of expenses.

PSU denied the request Aug. 7. On Aug. 25, the board gave notice of an executive session scheduled for Sept. 6 regarding the investigation. Lubrano then filed on Sept. 4 an emergency petition for a temporary injunction to pause the probe until PSU advances expenses to him so he can pay his legal bills incurred so far in the matter, as well as his future legal bills in the case.
Lubrano contended the university bylaws are a contract that provide both indemnification and advance of expenses to trustees who come under investigation. PSU disagreed and denied the request, but offered to advance $10,000 for his expenses, which Lubrano rejected.

Gibbons on Sept. 5 issued a temporary injunction and heard the case Sept. 12. Lubrano's legal bills had amounted to $140,000 from July 18 to Sept. 7. It's not clear how much has been incurred since.

Gibbons' ruling sides with Lubrano and keeps the investigation halted until PSU advances his expenses “as required by the bylaws." The order directs Lubrano to present his bills to the university as they are incurred. The nature of the investigation remains confidential but has been characterized in court proceedings as Lubrano having supposedly violated his fiduciary duty to PSU as a trustee. But the crux of the probe is not germane to the issues at hand in the injunction, which include: whether PSU is obligated to advance Lubrano's expenses in connection with its investigation of him; and whether he is entitled to have the probe halted until PSU pays his legal fees.

PSU argued Lubrano could afford to pay his own legal fees and expressed concern about the university having to issue a “blank check” to him, especially as appeals could ensue for some time. Gibbons determined the bylaws do not contain any means test and do not define reasonableness of expenses or limit them. Rather, the bylaws are “straightforward and mandatory,” in dictating that every trustee “shall be entitled as of right to have his expenses in defending any action paid in advance by the university, as incurred.”

PSU's attorney also referred to Lubrano as a “defendant” in the investigation and cited an exception for covering fees of defendants. But Gibbons noted Lubrano has not been charged with anything in the matter and is not a “defendant." The judge called the terminology a “thinly veiled attempt” by PSU to avoid advancing fees as required under its bylaws. PSU's reading of its own bylaws is “strained and contrived,” the judge ruled.

PSU also argued “no public interest is served” by an injunction in the university's investigation of complaints raised about a trustee. Gibbons rejected that notion, too, noting PSU was created in 1855 by an act of the state Legislature, and as a state university, PSU is partly supported by taxpayer funds.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.

PSU is going to have to pay some hefty legal fees after all the appeals processes play out.... The BOT never ceases to amaze me with the lengths they will go in their pettiness.... good thing there is transparency now otherwise there might have "anonymous complaints" by board members... oh wait
 

Sharkies

Active member
Nov 1, 2021
96
314
53
Judge: Penn State must pay legal defense bills of trustee under internal investigation.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.

"A Lackawanna County Court judge ruled Penn State must pay a trustee's legal fees in defending himself against an internal investigation by the university.

PSU's bylaws require that the college cover legal fees of a trustee who comes under investigation, even if the probe is by the university, according to the decision reached Monday by Judge James Gibbons. In documents and proceedings, trustee Anthony Lubrano claimed the investigation is “retaliation” for his Feb. 16 resolution to rename the football field at Beaver Stadium for former football coach Joe Paterno and his wife, Sue, as well as Lubrano's comments afterward to media about PSU tuition and capital projects.

On March 28, trustee leaders reprimanded Lubrano for presenting the Paterno resolution and for his comments. The board in March began an investigation of Lubrano based on anonymous complaints from other trustees regarding the resolution and his public comments. Lubrano, of Glenmoore, Chester County, was first advised of the investigation July 18. Four days later, he requested indemnification and advancement of expenses.

PSU denied the request Aug. 7. On Aug. 25, the board gave notice of an executive session scheduled for Sept. 6 regarding the investigation. Lubrano then filed on Sept. 4 an emergency petition for a temporary injunction to pause the probe until PSU advances expenses to him so he can pay his legal bills incurred so far in the matter, as well as his future legal bills in the case.
Lubrano contended the university bylaws are a contract that provide both indemnification and advance of expenses to trustees who come under investigation. PSU disagreed and denied the request, but offered to advance $10,000 for his expenses, which Lubrano rejected.

Gibbons on Sept. 5 issued a temporary injunction and heard the case Sept. 12. Lubrano's legal bills had amounted to $140,000 from July 18 to Sept. 7. It's not clear how much has been incurred since.

Gibbons' ruling sides with Lubrano and keeps the investigation halted until PSU advances his expenses “as required by the bylaws." The order directs Lubrano to present his bills to the university as they are incurred. The nature of the investigation remains confidential but has been characterized in court proceedings as Lubrano having supposedly violated his fiduciary duty to PSU as a trustee. But the crux of the probe is not germane to the issues at hand in the injunction, which include: whether PSU is obligated to advance Lubrano's expenses in connection with its investigation of him; and whether he is entitled to have the probe halted until PSU pays his legal fees.

PSU argued Lubrano could afford to pay his own legal fees and expressed concern about the university having to issue a “blank check” to him, especially as appeals could ensue for some time. Gibbons determined the bylaws do not contain any means test and do not define reasonableness of expenses or limit them. Rather, the bylaws are “straightforward and mandatory,” in dictating that every trustee “shall be entitled as of right to have his expenses in defending any action paid in advance by the university, as incurred.”

PSU's attorney also referred to Lubrano as a “defendant” in the investigation and cited an exception for covering fees of defendants. But Gibbons noted Lubrano has not been charged with anything in the matter and is not a “defendant." The judge called the terminology a “thinly veiled attempt” by PSU to avoid advancing fees as required under its bylaws. PSU's reading of its own bylaws is “strained and contrived,” the judge ruled.

PSU also argued “no public interest is served” by an injunction in the university's investigation of complaints raised about a trustee. Gibbons rejected that notion, too, noting PSU was created in 1855 by an act of the state Legislature, and as a state university, PSU is partly supported by taxpayer funds.

“We find that the public has significant interest in this state-created university and how it's governing Board of Trustees hews to its own bylaws and treats its own members,” Gibbons ruled.
Barry - I know you don't have to respond to this comment, nor will, given the legal ramifications, but this ruling offers potential avenues in both your own lawsuit as a BOT member and their "investigation" to try and push you out. Just sayin'.
 

NittPicker

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2021
3,363
6,891
113
The funny thing is that the board as a whole can just ignore Lubrano, Fenchek, or any other trustee not "on board" with the group as their numbers are overwhelming. It is curious that they choose to engage.
We all know from past experience what the results will be of investigations initiated by the board. The final report will say what they paid for it to say, all the facts be damned. I'm not a fan of the self-described penis in a ball cap but it's the same script now designed to go after him. Blow a bunch of money on something which isn't legally binding in any way whatsoever. Then use it as cover for shady personnel decisions. They must be taking advice from Frazier, Peetz, Surma, Suhey, Joyner, Masser, etc.
 
Last edited:
Sep 17, 2024
39
32
18
The funny thing is that the board as a whole can just ignore Lubrano, Fenchek, or any other trustee not "on board" with the group as their numbers are overwhelming. It is curious that they choose to engage.
True, until the pesky Alumni reps start legitimately questioning the highly suspect financial decisions (and underlying motives) made during the secretive Executive sessions (which are subject to FOI inquiry) and then the whole fiduciary thing becomes an issue.

I'm not certain PSU's BOT has thought through the potential consequences of their obvious vindictive actions.

Lubrano was smart filing his suit in Lackawanna County. It's important to get these issue out of the Centre County cesspool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sharkies and Bwifan

Bwifan

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,341
2,509
113
The funny thing is that the board as a whole can just ignore Lubrano, Fenchek, or any other trustee not "on board" with the group as their numbers are overwhelming. It is curious that they choose to engage.

That was my thinking as well in why are they engaging right now? They have more than enough votes and yes men for anyone to question anything they do.... This will bring light on them when they usually like operating in the dark. Only thing I can think of is that they just want all trouble makers off the board and now is the time. They don't want prying eyes or people questioning them in public. We all need a reminder that the PSU BOT operates under transparency and having everything open for everyone to see....
 
Last edited:

Keyser Soze 16802

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
701
1,490
93
It's pretty clear the cabal that runs the university has decided now is the time to finally rid themselves of all dissenting voices that ask hard questions

I hope they fail miserably but I'm not optimistic
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login