Wexner’s legal team motions to quash subpoena in Strauss sex abuse lawsuit

Davis Beatty
Thu, 29 Jan 2026 04:10:04 +0000
Campus, Instagram Page, Local, News, Politics, Judge Michael Watson subpoena ruling, Lantern reporting Wexner lawsuit, Les Wexner attorneys argue no knowledge, Les Wexner Board of Trustees subpoena, Les Wexner deposition attempt, Les Wexner Epstein subpoena Ohio, Les Wexner legal motion Southern District of Ohio, Les Wexner motion to quash subpoena, Les Wexner Ohio State lawsuit, Les Wexner subpoena service attempts, Les Wexner targeted for media attention claims, Ohio State Board of Trustees Strauss tenure, Ohio State handling of Strauss abuse, Ohio State naming controversy Wexner, Ohio State Richard Strauss class action, Ohio State sexual abuse legal battle, Ohio State Strauss abuse 177 victims, Ohio State trustees Strauss investigation, OSU Strauss sexual abuse lawsuit, OSU Strauss survivors deposition efforts, Richard Strauss survivors lawsuit Ohio State, Steve Snyder-Hill lawsuit statements, U.S. House Oversight subpoena Wexner Epstein, Wexner Medical Center Board chairman lawsuit, Woody Hayes Athletic Center Wexner name protest

Les Wexner’s attorneys motions to quash subpoena, claiming Wexner had no knowledge of Strauss during his time as a Board of Trustees member. Credit: Courtesy of TNS

Les Wexner’s attorneys filed a motion to quash the latest attempt to subpoena and depose Wexner in a class-action lawsuit against Ohio State over its handling of Dr. Richard Strauss’ sexual abuse.

Filed on Tuesday, the legal team argued in the motion to the U.S. Court for the Southern District of Ohio that there is no evidence of Wexner having relevant knowledge of Strauss or his victims. The attorneys also said Wexner is being targeted over other Board of Trustees members because Wexner’s public-figure status would gain media attention.

“Everyone agrees on one thing: there is no evidence of any kind whatsoever to suggest that Mr. Wexner has any relevant knowledge regarding Dr. Richard Strauss or his victims,” the motion said.

Steve Snyder-Hill, a lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in an email he thinks it is reasonable to ask Wexner questions about any Board of Trustees involvement with Strauss while he was working at Ohio State. He also refuted the argument that the subpoenas are merely to seek publicity.

“This is not a PR stunt as the filing would make people believe,” Snyder-Hill said.

Wexner is the founder of L Brands and chairman of the Wexner Medical Center Board. According to the document, he was on Ohio State’s Board of Trustees during Strauss’ tenure at Ohio State, during which Strauss sexually abused at least 177 students, mostly male athletes, while he was a physician at the university.

Strauss retired in 1998 and died by suicide in 2005.

The plaintiffs in the case, which are suing Ohio State over its handling of Strauss’ abuse, argue Wexner may have known about Strauss and his abuse.

Those representing the survivors of Strauss have attempted to serve a subpoena to Wexner four times. Earlier this month, a judge allowed them to attempt an alternative way to serve that subpoena, per prior Lantern reporting.

So far, the plaintiffs have attempted to depose Wexner at his New Albany home, at an Ohio State’s Board of Trustees meeting and through one of his attorneys, Matthew Ziegler, per prior Lantern reporting.

In the alternative serving, Judge Michael Watson granted the plaintiff’s to leave a copy of the subpoena with Wexner’s personal security personnel, mail it to his home or email a copy to Wexner’s attorney.?

Wexner’s legal team said in the motion that the plaintiffs have examined numerous public documents, complaints and have taken and defended 40 depositions of discovery witnesses and key Ohio State people, but these efforts have revealed no information about Wexner’s knowledge of Strauss.

“叠ut, with regard to Mr. Wexner, they have come up with nothing,” the motion read. “Not a single document, Fact Sheet, affidavit, pleading allegation, or fig leaf of cherry-picked testimony to show that Mr. Wexner has any relevant, discoverable knowledge. Yet they demand to take his deposition anyway.”

Additionally, Wexner’s legal team questioned the motive of the subpoena based on the focus of Wexner instead of the rest of the Board of Trustees who were also present during Strauss’ tenure.

“Plaintiffs’ focus on Mr. Wexner alone, to the exclusion of other Trustees who were also on the Board during this ‘critical time period of Strauss’s serial sexual abuse’ raises further questions concerning their true motive,” the document said.

The motion went on to mention attorney Alex Shumate, who was a board member from 1989-98 and was present at the meeting when Ohio State awarded Strauss emeritus status. Tamala Longaberger, another board of trustee member from 1996-2005, was also present at that meeting, the document said.

The document said that the plaintiffs have made no attempt to secure documents and deposition testimony from the other board members whose tenure overlapped with Strauss’ employment.

“For some still-unarticulated reason, it is only Mr. Wexner, who Plaintiffs have urged the state and federal government to investigate, with whom Plaintiffs insist that OSU must disassociate, and against whom Plaintiffs have protested multiple times, that Plaintiffs want to interrogate,” the motion said. “The reason why is obvious: it is only Mr. Wexner’s name that guarantees Plaintiffs media attention.”

In December, Snyder-Hill and other survivors of Strauss protested outside the Woody Hayes Athletic Center, calling for Wexner’s name to be removed from inside the building.

On Jan. 22, Ohio State formally denied a request to remove the name from the building, submitted by Snyder-Hill through Ohio State’s naming review procedure, per prior Lantern reporting.

Wexner was also subpoenaed earlier this month by the U.S. Committee on Oversight Reform for his ties with Jeffrey Epstein, per prior Lantern reporting.