The court would probably have to appoint a trustee to determine which emails qualify as “Liberty’s Confidential Information” (their term). If there are juicy emails to Granda or Becki, I doubt the trustee would turn those over. So as a fishing expedition, it fails.
I too don’t think the case is entirely meritless, just that in the absense of an employment agreement defining his duties as President, Chancellor, or Board Member on terms favorable to their claims, or the employment agreement having an enforceable morals clause (whether or not it refers to an external Liberty U code of conduct), it is quite weak. “Your daddy was a better man than you!” (graphs 20-23) isn’t a winning argument.