Share This Page

Ex-Greensburg Central Catholic football player sues, alleging threat

| Friday, March 8, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

A former football player at Greensburg Central Catholic High School sued the Diocese of Greensburg on Thursday, alleging he was threatened and knocked unconscious by an assistant coach last year during summer practice, according to a suit filed in Westmoreland County.

Tyler Alt, 19, of Hempfield, said he suffered a traumatic brain injury, concussion and cuts on his face when he was struck by then-assistant coach Dante Parker, according to the suit. Parker is not listed as a defendant in the suit.

Alt left Greensburg Central Catholic and graduated in 2012 from Quaker Valley High School in Allegheny County.

Jerry Zufelt, a spokesman for the diocese, said he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment on it.

Alt, who is listed as a center on the football team of Elon University in Alamance County, N.C., said in the lawsuit that he suffered an asthma attack in August during running drills and went to the locker room. Parker followed him and warned him: “Don't ever do it again ... I'll run you till you die,” he claims.

During practice later that day, Parker and Alt allegedly got into an argument during a punishment drill, and Parker hit Alt in the face, knocking the 6-foot-3-inch, 282-pound football player unconscious, according to the suit.

Alt was taken to Excela Health Westmoreland Hospital in Greensburg and transferred to Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, according to the complaint.

Richard Gazarik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.