LeQuint Allen is Back

[rocklloyd]

I’ve played golf with him a few times and enjoyed playing with him. Seems like a smart dude.

He played in our M/G last year.

 

[Maisel123!]

maybe the strategy was bring it into a public forum of a district court and the power of public opinion and outrage would cause the university to reconsider. I have never been moved in my 40+ years association with SU to contact university leadership about anything until I read about the gross injustice given to this student and the ineptness, unfairness, inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the student judicial system. This is as close as I have ever come to withholding my support for Syracuse University because of the travesty of justice surrounding this young man. I think Allen has grounds for a civil suit to receive some kind of reparations and damages.

I absolutely agree. I live in NYC but I have followed SU football since Archbold Stadium and go to games once in a while. I still hate Tennessee and the SEC officials for the fake and late flag "pass interference" penalty on 4th down years ago. But if LA doesn't play this year, I give up.

 

[orangefog]

I absolutely agree. I live in NYC but I have followed SU football since Archbold Stadium and go to games once in a while. I still hate Tennessee and the SEC officials for the fake and late flag "pass interference" penalty on 4th down years ago. But if LA doesn't play this year, I give up.

It's really hard to root for a program year after year when the university doesn't even want the athletics programs to succeed.

 

[Orangeman]

Calling out the coaches or the AD is misguided. They have no authority to intervene in this process. I think that LA playing in the bowl game and participating in Spring practices speaks for itself. Anything above and beyond that will be behind closed doors and without public comment or social media "support." The FrancoPizza types will need to adjust expectations.

Well then the school is just bananas and shut it all down.

 

[samspann1]

I’ll withhold my opinion of him…Know him quite well from the county and he’s the smartest guy in the room always. Just ask him

Are you sure he doesn’t post here?

 

[BKCuse]

Why wouldn’t it be?

Idk it’s hard to know when people are joking and I’d think a case could be made that a judge who is an alumni should recuse when a case is focused on their school.
Especially if the judge is well known to be an active fan of their school.
But considering SCOTUS judges no longer recuse despite glaring conflicts our guy Uncle Bob won’t have any issues

 

[HtownOrange]

Idk it’s hard to know when people are joking and I’d think a case could be made that a judge who is an alumni should recuse when a case is focused on their school.
Especially if the judge is well known to be an active fan of their school.
But considering SCOTUS judges no longer recuse despite glaring conflicts our guy Uncle Bob won’t have any issues

Not every contact rises to the level warranting a recusal. What you see as a glaring conflict is probably overblown by the media. So long as ethics are not violated, there rarely should be a recusal. Otherwise, no case could be heard locally. Even regional matters would require recusal more often than not as there are ties to the local matter.

A judge being an alumni is rarely a sufficient basis for the judge to recuse himself/herself from hearing a case. A recusal would require significantly more ties to the universit.

 

[hoopsupstate]

The University is winning. Fewer and fewer posts. Local media coverage has dropped.

 

[BKCuse]

Not every contact rises to the level warranting a recusal. What you see as a glaring conflict is probably overblown by the media. So long as ethics are not violated, there rarely should be a recusal. Otherwise, no case could be heard locally. Even regional matters would require recusal more often than not as there are ties to the local matter.

A judge being an alumni is rarely a sufficient basis for the judge to recuse himself/herself from hearing a case. A recusal would require significantly more ties to the universit.

As far as SCOTUS no the ties are not overblown by the media - AT ALL. In fact they are not being covered as much as they should.

As far as locally I don’t want that judge recused considering he’s reportedly:
- an alumni
- a huge Cuse sports fan
- a HS hoops Ref in off time (which only reinforces point #2)

But the same reasons I / we want him to hear this case are valid reasons for the other side to not feel like they will get an honest hearing. I’m sure you’re right this doesn’t rise to the level of needing to recuse BUT if things were done properly this would be a valid concern.

I’m no lawyer but I know enough to know Judges should recuse to avoid any perception of bias.

If I’m the other side I’m not happy at all the judge is who is.

 

[FreakTalksAboutSU]

The University is winning. Fewer and fewer posts. Local media coverage has dropped.

They caught a perfect time for it with the holidays

 

[SuFTW]

The University is winning. Fewer and fewer posts. Local media coverage has dropped.

There is no new information to report.

 

[Willy75]

There is no new information to report.

Things likely will ramp up again when SU files its response ahead of the court hearing, and then again when the hearing takes place.

 

[HtownOrange]

As far as SCOTUS no the ties are not overblown by the media - AT ALL. In fact they are not being covered as much as they should.

As far as locally I don’t want that judge recused considering he’s reportedly:
- an alumni
- a huge Cuse sports fan
- a HS hoops Ref in off time (which only reinforces point #2)

But the same reasons I / we want him to hear this case are valid reasons for the other side to not feel like they will get an honest hearing. I’m sure you’re right this doesn’t rise to the level of needing to recuse BUT if things were done properly this would be a valid concern.

I’m no lawyer but I know enough to know Judges should recuse to avoid any perception of bias.

If I’m the other side I’m not happy at all the judge is who is.

While I have no issue scrutinizing the SCOTUS, the same should hold true across the entire government.

To your point, it is nearly impossible to avoid any and all possible ties to any matter before the SCOTUS. All nine justices have taken positions during their career, known people, lawyers, politicians, business leaders, community leaders, etc. That would force recusal from someone on the bench. This is one reason the justices refuse to hear a case they previously heard.

I don't care what political side anyone is on, but all should be careful with draconian positions.* Turn about is fair play and it tends to escalate.

*Except as applied to Rutgers and Georgetown. Both should suffer every draconian punishment ever considered by man. Not that I am biased in anyway...

 

[FrancoPizza]

Things likely will ramp up again when SU files its response ahead of the court hearing, and then again when the hearing takes place.

How hard would it be for Bob to postpone the case until January? Can they come up with pretty much any reason?

Point being - maybe even if he can’t find a legal basis to overturn he can keep LA eligible by delaying the proceedings.

 

[atlanticuse]

It's really hard to root for a program year after year when the university doesn't even want the athletics programs to succeed.

First fraternities, now sports.
What's next? Oxygen?

 

[Willy75]

How hard would it be for Bob to postpone the case until January? Can they come up with pretty much any reason?

Point being - maybe even if he can’t find a legal basis to overturn he can keep LA eligible by delaying the proceedings.

That's unlikely given the nature of an injunction proceeding, and because it would be tantamount to him ruling for LA.

 

[FrancoPizza]

That's unlikely given the nature of an injunction proceeding, and because it would be tantamount to him ruling for LA.

Not necessarily. He would still have eligibility remaining for the following 2 years, and it would at least give him the choice of taking a spring/summer 2024 suspension or portaling.

 

[GoSU96]

How hard would it be for Bob to postpone the case until January? Can they come up with pretty much any reason?

Point being - maybe even if he can’t find a legal basis to overturn he can keep LA eligible by delaying the proceedings.

Not going to happen.

 

[Faegan]

First fraternities, now sports.
What's next? Oxygen?

If by Oxygen you mean Beer, yes.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Sorry if this is a stupid question. But what standing and jurisdiction does a NYS district court have in a private school discipline matter or a school's judicial board action? I guess if there was no standing the case would have been thrown out already. Can somebody explain how this upcoming court date can have a role in overturning this penalty?

The State doesn't "have standing"; it's the venue, and it's appropriate because it's the home county of the defendant.

Standing relates to the status of the litigants, and if they are a proper plaintiff under the statue under which they seek redress or damages.

For example, a person is not supposed to file a suit if the issue doesn't affect them personally, or if they weren't harmed by the other person's actions.

 

[atlanticuse]

If by Oxygen you mean Beer, yes.

Sorry, my NSFW filter corrected beer to oxygen
NSF SU

 

[Willy75]

The State doesn't "have standing"; it's the venue, and it's appropriate because it's the home county of the defendant.

Standing relates to the status of the litigants, and if they are a proper plaintiff under the statue under which they seek redress or damages.

For example, a person is not supposed to file a suit if the issue doesn't affect them personally, or if they weren't harmed by the other person's actions.

I think the crux of his question is where does the state court get jurisdiction in LA's case. The answer here (I think) is that the court has jurisdiction in an Article 78 involving private school discipline where the school hasn't followed its own rules and/or the penalty imposed is egregiously unfair.

 

[Willy75]

Not necessarily. He would still have eligibility remaining for the following 2 years, and it would at least give him the choice of taking a spring/summer 2024 suspension or portaling.

All I can say is that injunction proceedings are supposed to move expeditiously. The plaintiff is supposed to show he's in danger of suffering imminent harm unless the injunction is granted.

 

[GoSU96]

I think the crux of his question is where does the state court get jurisdiction in LA's case. The answer here (I think) is that the court has jurisdiction in an Article 78 involving private school discipline where the school hasn't followed its own rules and/or the penalty imposed is egregiously unfair.

Yep

 

[Dinkyspond]

The State doesn't "have standing"; it's the venue, and it's appropriate because it's the home county of the defendant.

Standing relates to the status of the litigants, and if they are a proper plaintiff under the statue under which they seek redress or damages.

For example, a person is not supposed to file a suit if the issue doesn't affect them personally, or if they weren't harmed by the other person's actions.

I guess my question in simplest form: Can the court reinstate him to school for the fall semester? If not, this whole filing was for the PR benefit and for that matter I think it worked but it won't get him back in school.