HARRISBURG, Pa. A Pennsylvania state senator sued the NCAA on Friday over its use of the $60 million fine that Penn State is paying for its handling of the child molestation scandal involving former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, two days after the governor filed an antitrust lawsuit against the organization.
Sen. Jake Corman, who represents the area where Penn States campus is located and chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, claims the NCAAs plans to spend the $60 million are an illegal violation of his oversight role for state government spending.
Even though the NCAA intends to wrest such a large sum of Pennsylvania public funds, it has refused to submit to any control by Pennsylvania elected officials and refused to commit more than 25 percent of those public funds to Pennsylvania causes, Cormans lawsuit said.
Ads by GoogleU.S. Military Records1) Enter Any Name & Search It! 2) Military Records Instantly Militaryrecords.us.org
Budget figures show the state contributed $214 million this year to Penn States $4.3 billion budget.
NCAA spokeswoman Emily Potter declined comment on Cormans suit.
On Wednesday, Gov. Tom Corbett sued in federal court in an effort to have all of the Sandusky-related NCAA penalties thrown out, including the $60 million fine, a four-year bowl ban and a reduction in football scholarships. The NCAA called that action meritless.
Friday also featured further legal maneuvering by a pair of Penn State administrators accused of covering up abuse allegations against Sandusky and an order restricting the use of electronic devices at a hearing next week in Sanduskys criminal case.
The county court filing by former Penn State administrators Gary Schultz and Tim Curley focus on the actions of Cynthia Baldwin, Penn States former chief counsel. The pair of court filings further explore their previously stated claim that their rights were violated when Baldwin accompanied them to grand jury appearances two years ago.
Curley and Schultz argue they were illegally deprived of adequate legal representation. At issue is whether Baldwin was acting as their lawyer, or solely on behalf of the university.