Ohio State Sex-Abuse Accusers Zero in on Wexner as Mediation Begins

More than seven years have passed since the abuses of Ohio State physician Richard Strauss were made public, and three years after Ohio State resolved its first round of settlements with 296 victims, a second wave of lawsuits is escalating as formal mediation begins.

Last week, the university and plaintiffs in five pending federal lawsuits—Snyder-Hill v. Ohio State, Knight v. Ohio State, Doe 162 v. Ohio State, Gonzalez v. Ohio State And Gresock v. Ohio State– convened for the first of several mediation sessions planned for the coming months. The talks are being facilitated by former U.S. District Judge Layn Phillips, who previously mediated Michigan State sexual abuse cases involving Larry Nassar.

More from Sportico.com

At the same time, Strauss’ survivors, led by former Ohio State wrestler and prominent whistleblower Mike DiSabato, staged a protest at a scheduled Ohio State Board of Regents meeting and confronted university leaders over the school’s ongoing ties to L Brands founder Les Wexner. Wexner, a longtime client of Jeffrey Epstein, donated millions to Ohio State and served two terms as a trustee from 1988 to 1997, when Strauss faced disciplinary hearings at the school and lost his job at the university.

Since last year, plaintiffs in the current cases have sought to detain Wexner, 88, and last month accused him of evading service in court cases. The law firm representing Wexner, who also refused to receive services on his behalf, is headed by attorney John W. Zeiger, the current chairman of the Ohio State Board of Regents.

“It defies all logic and logic that Mr. Wexner has no knowledge of Strauss or his victims,” ​​the plaintiffs wrote in their Nov. 19 motion, which documented repeated unsuccessful attempts to serve Wexner personally or through his attorneys. They asked the court for permission for alternative service.

On Wednesday, the State of Ohio filed a response, opposing their request and arguing that Wexner had nothing material to add to the case.

“[It] “Once again, it is clear that plaintiffs are seeking to impeach Mr. Wexner as part of their ongoing, improper effort to try their case in the court of public opinion rather than a court of law, which prejudices the public and potential jurors against Ohio State,” wrote Ohio attorney general Dave Yost, who represents the public university.

Wexner’s lawyer said in a statement through his spokesman: sporic He said the billionaire would take up the plaintiffs’ claim in court “at the appropriate time.”

“Since early September, we have asked plaintiffs’ attorneys several times to determine what information they believe Mr. Wexner had regarding the Strauss affair so that we could consider the request,” said Marion H. Little, Zeiger’s law partner. “Over the last three months, plaintiffs’ counsel has been unable to answer that question.”

Plaintiffs are also arguing with the State of Ohio over the admissibility of documents related to a 2019 investigative report by the law firm Perkins Coie, which conducted the independent review of OSU. Strauss scandal. report It was concluded that Strauss, who died by suicide in 2005, sexually abused at least 177 male patients under the guise of medical care.

“The Perkins Coie Report is a comprehensive, comprehensive, and damning account of how Ohio State not only knew about the serial sexual abuse of Dr. Richard Strauss, but also concealed and facilitated that abuse for decades,” the plaintiffs wrote in an Oct. 30 motion. They accuse OSU of “stonewalling” in producing non-public communications about the report.

In response, the school argued that the plaintiffs had attempted to “re-litigate” previous requests to have the report admitted into evidence, but the court had previously denied it on the grounds that it was premature.

A university spokesperson declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit but said in a statement: “Ohio State is a fundamentally different university today and has devoted significant resources to preventing and addressing sexual harassment over the past 20 years. These actions include new policies, programs, personnel and tools across the university, including athletics and the medical center.”

Collectively, these developments mark a new phase in the legal fight, with a trial scheduled for October 2026 if an agreement is not reached. Given the large number of plaintiffs making similar claims, the case is proceeding under a pioneering structure in which a smaller representative group of claims will be tried first to help gauge the evidence and legal issues, with the potential to lead to a broader global settlement. Following the court’s recent decision to extend the deadline, the parties’ lead plaintiff motions will be made on May 15.

As legal battles over discovery continue in court, a guerilla-style advocacy campaign has also ignited led by DiSabato and other Strauss victims who previously settled sexual abuse allegations against the school. Outside last Thursday’s board meeting, they held signs depicting Wexner’s ties to Epstein and called for the OSU mega-donor’s name to be removed from the Woody Hayes Athletic Center.

The Les Wexner Football Complex was named in 2007 following a $2.5 million donation from Wexner’s children’s foundation and charitable fund. But that donation was matched by another $2.5 million check from Epstein’s COUQ Foundation, provided under the same gift agreement. The school maintained that Epstein-related funds had no impact on the football facility’s naming rights.

But DiSabato and other critics argue that Wexner should leave the Buckeyes, given the perceived overlap of funding sources and his longstanding relationship with Epstein.

“I think this was a good example of using our voices to voice our legitimate concerns about a person with information about the Strauss case,” DiSabato said. sporic in a phone interview this week. “He either knew or he didn’t. Either way, this is information that is relevant to the case. He needs to testify as it relates to Strauss, and also, as a community, we should reconsider removing his name from the hallowed building, the Woody Hayes Athletic Center.”

In their latest motion, the sexual abuse plaintiffs are seeking court approval for alternative service so they can meet the due process requirements of serving Wexner without having to physically serve a subpoena on him or his representative.

When asked about Wexner’s naming rights, an Ohio State spokesperson stated: sporic the school is open to the public sent Naming review procedures state that removing a name is “a serious step that will only take place under exceptional and narrow circumstances.” The spokesman did not provide further details about Wexner.

Beyond Wexner, plaintiffs are in the process of deposing or deposing former Ohio State presidents Michael Drake and Gordon Gee, who recently retired from leadership positions at the University of California and West Virginia University, respectively. Gee was elected to L Brands’ board of directors in 2012. Neither Gee nor Drake responded to emails seeking comment.

Wexner had previously faced scrutiny for his connections to Epstein, who operated for years with access to Wexner’s properties and served as a close advisor; It was a relationship from which Wexner publicly distanced himself and apologized in 2019.

Wexner’s impact on Ohio State is extensive. In 2012, OSU once again recognized his contributions by naming the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, which will soon open a new hospital tower. Moreover, the plaintiffs note that Wexner’s wife, Abigail, served on the Ohio State board in 2018, the year DiSabato first publicly disclosed Strauss’ sexual misconduct. Columbus Dispatch.

In their petition seeking alternative service, the plaintiffs told the court they made three attempts to serve Wexner, starting at his home in New Albany, Ohio, where they were denied service by a security guard. They later assigned a sheriff’s deputy to serve Wexner at the same address, but again were unsuccessful.

“In the absence of a single written document regarding Mr. Wexner’s knowledge of Strauss or the investigation into Strauss’ sexual abuse of students, his testimony was necessary and the only way Plaintiffs could obtain information from him,” the petition stated.

Best of Sportico.com

Sign up Sportico’s Newsletter. Follow us for the latest news Facebook, excitementAnd instagram.