Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College – Defense wants damages reduced to $14.3 million under Ohio tort

[mystery-ak]

Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College – Defense wants damages reduced to $14.3 million under Ohio tort reform caps

 
 
Posted by William A. Jacobson      Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 2:00pm

Gibson’s Bakery says not so fast, proper calculation under Ohio tort reform law nets them $25 million

The massive $11 million compensatory and $33 million punitive damage verdicts in favor of Gibson’s Bakery and its owners have been matched by equally massive media condemnation of Oberlin College’s conduct.

In response, Oberlin College has developed a crisis management talking point that this “is a First Amendment case about whether whether an institution can be held liable for the speech of its students.” It’s a narrative of Oberlin College as victim, not the perpetrator the jury found it to be, and it’s being rolled out by Oberlin College with increasing media focus.

Of course, that’s not at all what the case was about. The case was about the conduct and speech of Oberlin administrators, particularly Senior Vice President and Dean of Students Meredith Raimondo, under standard and well settled principles that an employer is responsible for the tortious actions of employees acting within the scope of their employment. There is nothing novel about that legal principle, and in this case it was applied to Raimondo and other administrators, not to students

more
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/gibsons-bakery-v-oberlin-college-defense-wants-damages-reduced-to-14-3-million-under-ohio-tort-reform-caps/

[Cyber Liberty]

While the Antifa types will be very impressed by Oberlin's argument, the courts will take a much different view of the events (unless the Judges deciding the appeals are themselves Antifa types).

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Well, well.  Oberlin has made the news once again.  And it is good news, happening right before school begins.

Court: Oberlin College Must Post $36 Million Bond After Refusing to Pay Judgment

An Ohio judge has ordered Oberlin College to post a $36 million bond after it refused to pay the multi-million judgment to Gibson’s Bakery stemming from the family business’s defamation case against the college.
According to a report by Legal Insurrection, an Ohio judge has ordered Oberlin College to post a $36 million bond in response to its refusal to pay Gibson’s Bakery the multi-million judgment owed from a massive defamation lawsuit.
Gibson’s Bakery sued Oberlin College for their role in a smear campaign against the bakery over a shoplifting incident during which three black Oberlin students assaulted the store’s shopkeeper. The students, who pled guilty to the assault, have acknowledged that race played no role in the altercation.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/07/29/court-oberlin-college-must-post-36-million-bond-after-refusing-to-pay-judgement/

[Cyber Liberty]

Well, well.  Oberlin has made the news once again.  And it is good news, happening right before school begins.

Court: Oberlin College Must Post $36 Million Bond After Refusing to Pay Judgment

Is ordering a Bond in this situation standard procedure?  I genuinely don't know.

[Wingnut]

Is ordering a Bond in this situation standard procedure?  I genuinely don't know.

I hope it is not like algores SS lock box.

[Bill Cipher]

Is ordering a Bond in this situation standard procedure?  I genuinely don't know.

It depends, but bonds are not unheard of in the context of appellate proceedings. 

[Cyber Liberty]

I hope it is not like algores SS lock box.

No, this would be more like a Title Company's escrow account when you buy a house.

[Cyber Liberty]

It depends, but bonds are not unheard of in the context of appellate proceedings.

I appreciate the clarification.  So Oberlin does not have precedence on their side when they gripe about the bond.  After all, a surety bond is to guarantee the money doesn't "evaporate," turning the defendant into a turnip.  This isn't a bond to stay out of jail..

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Is ordering a Bond in this situation standard procedure?  I genuinely don't know.

From the clarifying article below, since Oberlin is appealing it must post the bond in lieu of the plaintiffs seizing assets to cover the judgement.

Oberlin College ordered to post $36 million bond to delay Gibson’s Bakery collection of Judgment

Judge granted Oberlin College’s motion to stay execution of the judgment, but required the posting of a bond in the amount of the judgment plus three years interest as security.

The compensatory and punitive damages of $25 million (after reduction for tort reform caps), plus the over $6.5 million in attorney’s fees and costs, put Oberlin College almost $32 million in debt to Gibson’s Bakery and its owners.

Absent some judicial action, the next step would have been for the Gibsons to execute on the judgment, meaning start collecting the money through post-judgment remedies, such as seizing bank accounts and physical property.


Oberlin College, which intends to appeal once post-trial motions are over, obviously doesn’t want its bank accounts, computer equipment, and er, Dean of Students’ office furniture, seized just as the freshman class was arriving. So Oberlin College filed a motion for a stay of execution of the judgment until such time as it can appeal and obtain an appeal bond.

We covered the parties’ arguments for and against in our prior post, Gibson’s Bakery: “there is serious concern about [Oberlin College’s] ability to pay this sizeable judgment three years from now”. Gibson’s Bakery devoted much of its opposition to arguing for a bond on the basis that Oberlin College was in poor financial shape.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/07/oberlin-college-ordered-to-post-36-million-bond-to-delay-gibsons-bakery-collection-of-judgment/

Ironically, it was the college's own arguments of its weak financial situation that precipitated the bond being required.  The judge deemed the judgement against the college may not be accessible to the plaintiffs.

I love it.  Oberlin just gets stepping in its own goo.  And BTW, it won't apologize for anything.

[dfwgator]

In a related story, People In Hell Want Ice Water.

[Cyber Liberty]

From the clarifying article below, since Oberlin is appealing it must post the bond in lieu of the plaintiffs seizing assets to cover the judgement.

Oberlin College ordered to post $36 million bond to delay Gibson’s Bakery collection of Judgment
Ironically, it was the college's own arguments of its weak financial situation that precipitated the bond being required.  The judge deemed the judgement against the college may not be accessible to the plaintiffs.

I love it.  Oberlin just gets stepping in its own goo.  And BTW, it won't apologize for anything.

IOW, Oberlin had every incentive to "disappear" the money and become the proverbial turnip from which no blood can be obtained.  They already placed their markers on the "too poor to pay" argument by pleading poverty.

Yes, this is great news from a no-nonsense Judge.

[verga]

BKMK

[Fishrrman]

"Court: Oberlin College Must Post $36 Million Bond After Refusing to Pay Judgment"

"So Oberlin College filed a motion for a stay of execution of the judgment until such time as it can appeal and obtain an appeal bond..."

OK.
But...

How "open-ended" is "such time as it can" ?
A month? Three months?  A year?
What happens if they refuse to pay?
(which they will do)

What do the plaintiffs do next?
What can the court do next?

[Cyber Liberty]

"Court: Oberlin College Must Post $36 Million Bond After Refusing to Pay Judgment"

"So Oberlin College filed a motion for a stay of execution of the judgment until such time as it can appeal and obtain an appeal bond..."

OK.
But...

How "open-ended" is "such time as it can" ?
A month? Three months?  A year?
What happens if they refuse to pay?
(which they will do)

What do the plaintiffs do next?
What can the court do next?

And that's why there's a surety bond.  To make sure the Plaintiff collects if there is an eventual award.  There has to be a decision eventually, probably years away.