Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Gibson’s Bakery: If Oberlin College appeals, we will seek reinstatement of full $44 million original verdict

Gibson’s Bakery: If Oberlin College appeals, we will seek reinstatement of full $44 million original verdict

Issues updated and expanded Frequently Asked Questions presenting additional evidence from the trial.

The Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College lawsuit has entered two post-trial phases: (1) Post-trial motions then appeals, and (2) public relations.

As part of this jockeying, Oberlin College’s president Carmen Twillie Ambar has written op-eds and given interviews in which she asserts that Oberlin College was held responsible for the speech of students. This, she argues, presents a threat to campus 1st Amendment rights because it could force universities to clamp down on student speech to avoid liability.

The effort to push out this theme has been well-planned and sustained, and included a FAQ information sheet for alumni. The basis of this public relations campaign, as we have pointed out repeatedly, is false. Oberlin College was not held liable for student speech but for the speech and conduct of its administrators in spreading alleged defamatory statements and interference with business and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The Gibsons’ attorneys disputed Oberlin College’s claim it was held liable for student speech, and released their own FAQ information sheet, which went into detail on the evidence presented at the trial. David Gibson also recently released a video statement in which he asserts that Oberlin College is planning to drag out the appeals process because it knows he has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer:

“They’re are sending a clear message to me and to my 91-year-old dad that they will just wait us out.”

(if video does not load, click here)

Yesterday the Gibsons’ attorneys further issued a statement regarding the outstanding issues, including an extensively expanded Q&A information sheet. The full statement is below, the numbered paragraphs subheadings and the quoted text are original, the commentary after each mine, emphasis is added.

1. REDUCTION OF JURY VERDICT AWARD FROM $44,298,000.00 to $25,049,000.00

Current Ohio statutes place a cap on the amount that a jury can award for non-economic compensatory damages suffered by individuals as well as capping the amount of punitive damages to two times the amount of compensatory damages. Accordingly, Judge John Miraldi reduced the jury verdict from  $44,298,000.00  to  $25,049,000.00. The Gibson Plaintiffs believe that these caps are unconstitutional in that they deprive damaged parties of the full protection and benefit of a jury trial. Juries in Ohio are entrusted with the wisdom and power in capital punishment cases to deal with the death penalty, but certain interests do not believe that these same jurors have sufficient wisdom to determine appropriate compensatory or punitive damages. In the event that this case is appealed, the Gibson Plaintiffs intend to seek to have the full verdict restored. Thirteen other states in the Union that have been faced with this issue have ruled that similar caps are unconstitutional.

WAJ: That the Gibsons might counter-appeal is not new, but it raises the stakes for Oberlin College. If a constitutional challenge to damage caps were to succeed, that would add almost $20 million to the damages, bringing the total including attorney’s fees awarded already to over $50 million plus accumulating interest. So an appeal is not cost free to Oberlin College.

2. AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES

Judge John Miraldi on July 17, 2019 granted Gibson’s’ motion to award attorney fees and litigation expenses in the total amount of $ 6,565,531.79. As a part of the process whereby a jury in Ohio awards punitive damages, the jury can also make a determination that the winning party is entitled to an additional amount for attorney fees and litigation expenses, in an amount deemed appropriate by the Court. The purpose of an award of attorney fees in punitive damage situations is to attempt to preserve access to the justice system by having the losing party, which has maliciously and/or recklessly damaged the other party, pay for the expenses of bringing the lawsuit. Otherwise, it would be problematic for individual “Davids” to be able to hire competent counsel and effectively litigate against “Goliaths”. The jury was unanimous in making this determination of malicious and/or reckless conduct in the Gibson case.

WAJ: Nothing to add here.

3. DECISION GRANTING A STAY PREVENTING ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS TO SATISFY THE JUDGMENT AMOUNT AND ESTABLISHING A BOND  TO SECURE THE FUTURE PAYMENT OF THE JUDGMENT

The successful party in civil litigation may attach the assets of the unsuccessful party to satisfy the judgment. If the losing party refuses to promptly pay a legal judgment but it doesn’t want its assets attached, it may seek an order preventing the successful party from satisfying the judgment, pending an appeal or post-judgment procedures. To ensure that the request preventing the immediate satisfaction of a judgment does not prevent the successful party from ultimately receiving the benefit of the Court’s judgment, the Court customarily requires the posting of a supersedeas (sometimes referred to as an appeal bond) in an amount that provides the winning party with guaranteed security that the judgment plus interest at the rate of 5%  will be paid in full after the conclusion of post-judgment and appellate proceedings. Judge Miraldi ordered the Oberlin defendants to post a bond in the amount of $36,367,711.56 which has been done.

WAJ: Nothing to add here.

4. BUSINESS OUTLOOK FOR GIBSONS BAKERY FOLLOWING THE VERDICT

There are ongoing challenges in the fight for the survival of the 134-year-old family business. Oberlin College has waged a public campaign critical of the jury’s verdict. The Gibsons believe that Oberlin College’s refusal to acknowledge the message sent by the jury, while refusing to resume historical business relationships, continues to fuel the financial pressure on the Bakery’s existence. Compounding the gravity of these challenges, a very serious medical condition requires Dave Gibson and his wife to be absent from the Bakery for a period of at least 3-4 weeks while he receives intensive treatment at an out of state medical institution. In addition to the substantial expense of his treatments, Dave’s absence presents additional challenges to the business. As testified to in the trial, the Bakery’s workforce was significantly reduced because of lost business following the shoplifting incident. Because his absence will soon be noticed by the Oberlin community, and because it has been difficult for the family to respond to everyone who’s reached out to them, Dave made the decision to share some of these developments through the Bakery’s Facebook page. Our thoughts and prayers are with Dave, Lorna, and their family as they continue this difficult journey. Despite these challenges, the Gibson family remains committed to continued operation of the bakery in Oberlin.

WAJ: Note the highlighted sentences. Gibson’s Bakery clearly is having financial difficulties as a result of the loss of the college’s business, plus presumably a boycott by most of the college community. For that, the jury compensated the Gibson’s. But that money is years away. The open question is whether the bakery can survive a three-year appeal process.

5. FAQs SUPPLEMENTATION

Oberlin College’s post-trial public campaign attacking the message and lessons to be learned from the jury’s verdict has raised a number of issues which should be examined in light of the actual facts, evidence and applicable law which were submitted at the trial. A few commentators, apparently without interest in or access to the testimonial and documentary evidence in the case, have published misleading opinions regarding the issues and consequences of the jury’s verdict. Thus because, there appears to be some confusion regarding the actual facts and legal issues at trial, and so that the public will not be misled with further damage being inflicted on the Gibsons, we have been authorized to supplement the FAQs previously issued. The updated FAQs are available here: https://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UPDATED-FAQs-re-Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College.pdf

WAJ: The Supplemental FAQs are detailed, and include multiple updated and new sections responding, in part, to Oberlin College’s public claims about the facts. This obviously is the Gibsons’ read of the trial transcript, but it’s a good preview of some of the evidentiary arguments that will be made on appeal.

https://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UPDATED-FAQs-re-Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College.pdf

https://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UPDATED-FAQs-re-Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College.pdf

[David Gibson and Allyn W. Gibson at trial][Photo credit Bob Perkoski for Legal Insurrection Foundation]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

BerettaTomcat | August 8, 2019 at 10:28 pm

Ambar is not a good liar, but Leftism is rooted in lies. Free speech, sure, but only if the speech is true. Pollute the commons with false speech at your peril.

    She and the other loon are clearly affirmative action hires. They can regurgitate the prog nonsense, but they’re just too dumb to do so convincingly. Surely sanity will prevail at the University and these clowns will get ejected uncerimoniously.

      artichoke in reply to Paul. | August 9, 2019 at 7:43 am

      What will happen to the college?

      You know what, I haven’t really given that much thought. It doesn’t matter to me.

    “Leftism is rooted in lies.”

    This. It was so from the beginning, but the number and complexity of the lies has increased as leftists have been faced with the failures of their theories. And endlessly growing system of deferents and epicycles to “explain” why observed reality does not agree with their cosmic system.

Talk about high stakes poker: appeal, and we’re going after the full $44M award. What a case!

    healthguyfsu in reply to walls. | August 9, 2019 at 12:19 am

    My hunch is that this goes into settlement and that is a card to play for the settlement that keeps Oberlin from coming back with something insulting like <10 million.

      Valerie in reply to healthguyfsu. | August 9, 2019 at 12:34 am

      Oerlin should settle, but the school’s decision-makers thus far have failed to exhibit the wherewithal to critically consider the issues before them. This is how businesses go bankrupt.

        artichoke in reply to Valerie. | August 9, 2019 at 7:44 am

        Who said Oberlin has the opportunity to settle? There’s a judgment. Pay it.

          pst314 in reply to artichoke. | August 9, 2019 at 9:00 am

          There was an opportunity. 🙂

          healthguyfsu in reply to artichoke. | August 9, 2019 at 10:16 am

          There’s still opportunity for settlement post-verdict as their card to play is the lengthy appeals process. Oberlin can still angle for a discount on their idiocy, but it will cost them a whole lot more than if they had settled pre-trial (or better yet had just reconciled with the Gibson’s).

        AlexanderYpsilantis in reply to Valerie. | August 14, 2019 at 7:50 am

        Ambar and Raimundo are clearly fighting for their jobs first, then Oberlin second. I’m amazed that the Board has let them get away with this for so long, they are going to end up massively INCREASING the settlement left unchecked.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to walls. | August 9, 2019 at 9:31 pm

    Gibson seems to a very nice person who carries a big stick. I appreciate his spunk.

    I made significant money by 40, and then spent over two decades running an advocacy group pro bono. I carried a big stick, and greatly enjoyed kicking the living crap out of people who mistakenly believed that no one could hold them accountable. By the time they realized I had them in my cross hairs, it was too late. I greatly enjoyed working with like minded people.

It feels to me like Oberlin has talked themselves into this.

They’re CONVINCED that they’ve done absolutely nothing wrong.

And if they really, truly believe that, then of course they’re going to appeal and fight the hideous injustice of paying the evil racists!

They are incapable of stepping back and logically looking at this situation. They’re right, and anybody that tries to convince themselves otherwise is wrong.

That’s how these people think.

    artichoke in reply to Olinser. | August 9, 2019 at 7:47 am

    They don’t care whether they’ve done anything or lots of things wrong. The agenda requires that they must not allow the Gibsons to win this fight, because that would be too awful to contemplate. People like the Gibsons aren’t supposed to win, don’t you see? They can’t be allowed control!

    That’s what Oberlin thinks and feels about this. It’s a part of Ambar’s mission to ensure the Gibsons don’t have a clean win, and her fellow progs are behind her. It doesn’t even need to be said; it’s understood.

      j-comment in reply to artichoke. | August 9, 2019 at 11:17 am

      +1

      By now the college has so much emotional capital tied up in defending their narrative that they literally can’t contemplate any path other than scorched-earth proceed-at-any-cost.

      I can’t tell whether there’s an outside actor pushing in this direction. Whether or not there is, the college appears to be all in on sticking to their story. I expect that if/when they finally do pay the judgement, there will still be not one gram of contrition. Their story will be that they are the shining hope, the evil forces of reactionary racists have won this one, therefore the fight must continue redoubled.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Olinser. | August 9, 2019 at 9:35 pm

    They have been on the affirmative gravy train their whole lives.

    Ohio Skeptic in reply to Olinser. | August 10, 2019 at 4:19 pm

    I would love to see what the numerical numbers of accepted students who are STILL coming to Oberlin for the incoming Freshman Class. I would also love to see the financial skew of how much money those incoming Freshmen are actually paying vs. financial aid … as compared to the last 4 years incoming Freshmen classes.

    IF Oberlin is following in the footsteps of other colleges where the Liberal Mindset, and SJWs, have run rampant, well the check writer types (ie: the moms and dads with an actual ability PAY for college out of their own pockets – vs heavily using financial aid) tend to NOT to be so generous with their checks to colleges where craziness runs rampant. Antioch College, which WAS down the road in Yellow Springs Ohio (another uber liberal college), although an old example now is a very good example of what happens when that uber Liberal craziness goes extreme. (Antioch went bankrupt)

    As noted above, Oberlin’s Administrators Mindset is so removed from reality that probably the lawsuit is NOT going to change their mindset one iota … but a collapse in PAYING students actually showing up? It may not change the mindset of the Administrators, but it will certainly get the attention of the Board of Trustees.

Good to see the Gibsons hanging tough. Don’t let those elitist snobs off of the hook.

Allegations of diversity are not to be taken lightly. Oberlin needs to compensate Gibsons for the vicious slander and accompanying occupation and protection of its wayward students and staff.

TheOldZombie | August 9, 2019 at 2:34 am

Go for it Gibson’s!

You’d think that at some point others at the college would step in and say, “that’s enough” but apparently the progressive disease has taken over every square inch of the college.

    MajorWood in reply to TheOldZombie. | August 10, 2019 at 7:37 pm

    No one at the college will speak up because of the implied threat of numbers. The only two faculty members who spoke out against the college in the beginning were emeriti, and we know how they were treated. The entire place is essentially under mob rule and I don’t think that Raimondo saying that she’d unleash the students was a slip of the tongue. While only 10% of the student body participated in the protest, none of the other 90% spoke up because they knew that they’d be the next target of the protestors. And who is a student that is being targeted going to complain to? The Dean of Students? Let us know how that works out.

    The faculty are now in a situation of bad or worse as the only two choices. Bad will be a freeze and/or reduction in numbers or salaries over time. Worse will be acting now and speaking up about the poor decisions that are going on and thus facing negative consequences sooner. The college reminds me of Bob Neil’s Germany since 1914 class coming to life. On a plus note, it is just a college within a small bubble within rural Ohio. And at present we have a surplus of similar colleges. The possible loss of Oberlin College will affect that community, but no more so than the loss of factories has affected at least a hundred similar sized burgs in the last 50 years. Ohio is still ticking.

    I don’t think that the whole college is diseased. But the diseased part is definitely trying to run the show, and that is bad. The main difficulty is that there doesn’t seem to be any way to run an intervention, or to have the effect of an intervention, in this case, the trial, come to fruition in the near future. By the time the college is finally held accountable for its activities, it will be too late. They will be 3 years deeper in the hole that they are still actively digging, and with way fewer people willing to toss them a rope. In addition to the $50+M that ill be gone due to legal means, there will likely be a 10-15% self-induced decrease in enrollment and another $20-30M of endowment capital will have been pissed away trying to plug holes. My first AA sponsor correctly told me that 95% of sobriety dates are on tombstones, and the way that Oberlin is treating this tells me which group they belong to. They are invested heavily in the 2-step program. Step 1, it gets worse. Step 2, it gets worse than you can possibly imagine. To me, Oberlin is that college era girlfriend who just went off the deep end in her later years.

    A friend asked me the other day how I thought Oberlin was progressing through the 5 stages of grief. I told him that they were actually going backwards. They seemed to be moving forward into bargaining, but now are backtracking into anger. Only time will tell if they can regain denial. Sadly, I think that they have that in them. We’ll know if spokespeople start referring to getting assistance in this matter from President Obama.

      MajorWood, you speak of an intervention with a tone of hopelessness. In reality, you are doing your part to help scare the Queen and her court into facing reality. Every little bit that you can do to rattle those delusional power addicts is a public service. The rats among the trustees and the administration are running scared, and it is vital to keep the heat on them until they crack – which will happen in a matter of time. Tyrants die slowly, but they do die.

      The battle to eradicate the rats infesting this great institution can be won, and many good people can be saved from what currently looks like a sinking ship. I pledge to do my part to help smoke the rats out into daylight.

      In all my years of being in the Oberlin sphere, I have never been part of a protest or civil disobedience action. The time has come for that to change. The gutless trustees and administration have made me realize that they must be confronted in the name of decency. The college’s ferocious SJWs will eventually be recognized for what they are — the gutless wonders of the Western World.

      To all that read this, remember the lesson of Vietnam. People with rakes and hoes did what they could when they could and eventually defeated the US military. The rats in Oberlin’s boardroom seem to understand the lesson from the My Lai massacre court-martial well. The rationale behind “The only way I knew to liberate the village was to destroy it” today applies to the Gibsons.

      /s/ JD Nobody, OC ’61.

        AlexanderYpsilantis in reply to J.D.Nobody. | August 14, 2019 at 8:03 am

        Well said. It’s up to the folks that love Oberlin College-or at least what it used to be-to HOUND the current Administration until they are compelled to settle and then leave. Make it impossible for them to continue.

        As Gandhi noted, being persistent in a just cause has a power that nobody can stand up to over time. Ambar and Raimundo will crumble.

Generally, when what you see does not make sense, it is because there is an agenda behind the curtain. Calling Carmen bad liar is actually a type of compliment. If she has some moral character in her, she is taking some serious orders from somebody.

I suggest Oberlin is a tool for somebody. The Oberlin reputation or survival does not seem important to whomever is calling the Oberlin moves.

Remember that leftists use people and then discard them when their utility is gone. Leftists also attempt to destroy their enemies, such as the Gibsons.

This seems to be a battle and Oberlin is just an expendable weapon. Who is in the control room is the question? We then know the agenda.

    TX-rifraph in reply to TX-rifraph. | August 9, 2019 at 7:46 am

    Oberlin may have been in charge in the early days. But, LI put this on an international stage – high stakes now. Mr. Big is now calling the shots (apologies to Rocky).

    “By any means necessary” may create collateral damage (such as to Oberlin), but that price is never paid by Mr. Big. Who is Mr. Big?

    Carmen’s assignment is to take the arrows. She can’t sell the narrative very well because she does not believe it. They will get a real sociopath out in front when they need to. Somebody who can say whatever lie or absurdity and never blink. Think Democrat Presidential wannabes.

    By any means necessary implies that humility is a weakness possessed by your enemies and should be exploited. Unmitigated arrogance is what we see on display by Oberlin. Oberlin is collateral damage to Mr. Big. The ideology and the objective matter. Oberlin’s reputation or existence does not.

    A magician wants you to analyze what you see, not what you don’t see. Your clue is that what you see does not make sense.

      On the phonecast with Alumni on June 27, there was President Ambar along with Board of Trustees Chairman Canavan. He appears to be a close associate of Soros.

        Oberlin1975 in reply to jb4. | August 9, 2019 at 7:05 pm

        The Chair of Oberlin’s Board of Trustees, Chris Canavan, is an executive with George Soros: https://www.oberlin.edu/general-counsel-and-secretary/trustees.

        His job title (this is directly from oberlin.edu): Director, Global Policy Development Soros Fund.
        Management, LLC.

        His bio on the Oberlin site reads, part: “Chris Canavan is Director of Global Policy Development at Soros Fund Management, LLC. He joined Soros in July 2010 and works on a variety of policy-related projects for the principals of the fund….”

    artichoke in reply to TX-rifraph. | August 9, 2019 at 8:08 am

    I just think that (to them) Gibson’s really is the enemy, just as it’s been since it refused to stop calling the cops on criminals in the store. They would be heroes if they win, and they would be a constant “thorn in the side” of Oberlin’s control. The left needs a win here, for the agenda, so the next Gibson’s at the next college doesn’t get any ideas about not knuckling under.

    Usually the college wins against the town. One place they didn’t win is around the University of Chicago, where the university tried for decades to buy up the surrounding poor black neighborhood (Hyde Park) to expand their campus. Yale and other colleges with lots of money have done this successfully. UC eventually failed due to constant vigilance by the neighborhood to prevent gentrification, includeing anti-gentrification rallies more than once, and finally UC effectively built a wall around itself which is what is there now — a wall of (I think) apartment buildings.

    If the poor blacks in that neighborhood can organize, maybe the people in Oberlin can organize. The college is probably also afraid of that. It’s the wrong battle to fight now because the college won’t even be expanding; small colleges are closing not expanding. But still the town must be put in its place.

      Artichoke, you are right about standing up to the modern Oberlin idea of the divine right of queens. The Civil Rights and Vietnam protests of the 60s involved real issues. Many of us disagreed with those protesters, but no one ever seriously accused the protesters of protesting something that did not exist. More recently, even the culturally polluted sushi existed. Today is different.

      Upon reading the police report of the attempted wine theft at Gibson’s and its police bodycam footage, it is an enormous stretch to see this as a racist incident. Carmen, like any gifted trial lawyer, is good at elasticizing the truth and deflecting it into a freedom of speech issue.

      Interestingly, Black Lives Matter got involved in the mess and then seems to have disappeared. They are not stupid people and apparently figured out that they had been suckered into a fight over something that did not exist.
      Your suggestion that the poor blacks of Oberlin organize and stand up to the college’s lust for power is a great idea. Many in the local black community support the Gibsons because they know that the Gibsons are not bad people.

      If Martin Luther King Jr. could return to the college today for a repeat performance of his 1956 Finney Chapel address, what might he say? Surely, he would never think to accuse Queen Carmen Twillie Ambar and her lady-in-waiting of being modern Sheriff Bull Connors. But then, hasn’t 1960s Alabama perversely come to Oberlin?

      Now all who read this can say in all honesty that Nobody ever thought of these considerations.

      /s/ JD Nobody, OC ’61.

        artichoke in reply to J.D.Nobody. | August 10, 2019 at 12:04 pm

        I was thinking of the Oberlin community generally and didn’t even know whether poor blacks live there or not. But sure they too stand to gain by helping their community.

          Oberlin has the most extreme income inequality of any community in Lorain County, which contains the economically troubled industrial cities of Lorain and Elyria. Some of Oberlin’s blacks (the ones who are not homeless) nevertheless live in extreme poverty, yet are hanging on by their fingernails.

          Queen Carmen Twillie Ambar and her Lady-in-waiting Raimondo are NOT homeless and NOT living in poverty. Indeed, the college supplied president’s home is one classy house. In short, Ambar and Raimondo live in an opulent elitist paradise compared to how most blacks and “the other 90%” in Oberlin live.

          With every day that passes one is forced to ask ever more strongly what might be the hidden agenda in fighting the Gibsons so viciously? Carmen’s scorched earth policy against the honorable Gibsons contains no apparent rationale save for it possibly being a very sick power trip. My goodness. Could there be such a thing as black on black racism?

          /s/ JD Nobody, OC ’61.

          BTW, Tomorrow I plan to stop at the Gibson’s store to give them my moral support and maybe buy one of Gibson’s yummy ice cream cones.

      A thought about your reminder that the Queen’s lady-in-waiting wanted the cops to turn shoplifters over to her rather than arrest them. Isn’t she advocating for vigilante justice, with her being the vigilante? After all, when one has all the righteousness of Oliver Cromwell, courts are hardly needed.

      /a/ JD Nobody

Txrifraph hit the nail on the head. There is something that is not transparent here yet.

    sdharms, you have hit the nail on the head. Legally, the feckless trustees are in control, but are they? Is Carmen the Rasputin here, or is she just a fall girl?

    Sdharms – You might also point out that concurrently with Txrifraph hitting the nail on the head, Carmen and the Trustees have instead chosen to hit their heads on the nail.

    /s/ JD Nobody

What an irony were Oberlin to achieve its goal of elevating this case to a state Supreme Court case only to have the compensatory damages cap ruled unconstitutional. There IS a God.

If Oberlin is so strapped for cash, as they have claimed in court, then how can they afford to pay their lawyers for the appeals?

    Don’t you believe in tooth fairies and leprechauns? Just grab any leprechaun, squeeze him by the you-know-whats, and he will cough up all the gold the college needs.

So the college had administrators at the protests to direct the protesting students but the college was not involved in the protests. How could anyone argue with logic like that?

    artichoke in reply to MarkS. | August 9, 2019 at 8:21 am

    Also, Ambar said in the interview that having administrators there was required in the *Student Handbook*. That means it’s a rule for students, and by supplying Meredith Raimondo, the college was “blessing” the demonstration so the students knew they were following all the rules in their student handbook.

    The college might have been able to prevent this by not sending Raimondo.

    Students are entitled to their constitutional rights of free speech, but they’re not entitled to college sponsorship of their off-campus ruckuses.

Let’s hope the bureaucrats at other prog universities and colleges are following this as closely as we are. Martha, are you listening?

Question for the actual lawyers on here

Can Gibsons include in their countersuit an appeal for the reputational damage repair that was in the case but the first judge dismissed? That would bring it up a lot more than just repealing the tort cap. Actually if behavior changes on the part of Oberlin were included, it might be still going up even as we speak (to the point, additional costs due to continuing the damaging behavior after being judged as unlawful and financially liable is something that is desperately needed)

Oberlin College will appeal at some point. Their intent I believe is to delay for Gibson’s to close the doors either by a death or lack of funding. This would supply Oberlin with a win in their view regardless of the money spent or paid. They will continue to maintain the mantra of no wrong doing and the students were exercising free speech. Money is of no concern to being right even if wrong.
Students will be returning soon and I would be ready for more protests and that scene should be meet with a restraining order quickly . You can be assured it will happen only to further Oberlin’s stand of free speech. Ramondo will not be seen but her minions will have marching orders.
This is what they need in the appeal to the OSC or movement to the fed side. That is the game as I see it.

I hope the Gibsons have explored the option of borrowing against the jury award. That kind of financing is very expensive, but if I were in their shoes I would certainly consider borrowing a million or so.

David in Cal | August 9, 2019 at 5:53 pm

Oberlin’s leadership may not care what’s best for Oberlin. From their selfish POV, it’s best to push the payment into the future. By claiming that the verdict was unjust and by not paying the judgement, they can more or less avoid blame for their dreadful handling of this episode.

Re Pres. Ambar’s claim that the college is being blamed for the students’ actions. WRONG! As much as anything, the college administration and secondarily the trustees are being blamed for their egregious dereliction of duty in not issuing a disclaimer for the libelous words of students and administrators, which represented the opinions of the individuals and not the opinions of the college.

Carmen, I have tried to be restrained in my criticism of you and Meridith Raimondo. In light of the many comments on this blog from seasoned lawyers, I must now ask the question that is on many minds: How the hell did you ever get through law school? I hope that law school did not teach you that freedom of speech includes the right to libel and slander.

Shame on you and the feckless trustees for the dereliction of duty which has needlessly created this mess, and that has done enormous damage to the college’s reputation.

I wonder … is Oberlin’s defamation continuing, based upon its misrepresentations of the trial?

    jb4 in reply to BD1957. | August 9, 2019 at 8:40 pm

    That question interests me as well. If their lawyers think that it is, can they sue all over again?

    MajorWood in reply to BD1957. | August 10, 2019 at 2:18 pm

    I think it would be more interesting to see 300 additional suits filed against those identified in the videos. Make each one for $200K in damages and then really watch the screams begin. Useless degree, massive student loan, and potential lawsuit judgement (legal fees a bonus). That would be the new SJW trifecta. They could add financial bankruptcy to their moral bankruptcy. Oberlin is likely going to see a massive drop in new admissions and a large number of transfers out by those who matriculated solely to be in SJW camp for four years. A suit against current and former students involved in the 2016 protests would really turbo-charge that effect. If Oberlin thought that the first round of ill-advised discovery was bad, this would be priceless.

The hypothesis that someone with money is causing the college to implode so that they can buy it cheap and rename it in their own image (vs building one from the ground up) is gaining more traction with me. I am 8 for 12 for suicide interventions and experience tells me that this is not heading towards a good outcome.

The people on https://www.reddit.com/r/Whatcouldgowrong/ are making better decisions than Oberlin these days. BTW, turn down the volume for “what could go wrong if I pepperspray this bear.” Imagine living with that for a week!

    No one is doing this to try to buy the college on the cheap. With their $900M endowment and hundreds of millions in art, failure would probably take very many years.

    In my opinion, Occam’s Razor applies here … they are mostly SJW, the judgment won’t break the college (as said by Board Chairman Canavan on the 6/27 alumni call), and they could never concede error to a bakery of “deplorables” – they could not even do the latter when, reportedly, they could have gotten out of this mess for zero. Hearing that the college has known about Gibson’s condition since February reinforces my view. For reference, I offer that Colorado state agency that continued going after that cake bakery, even after losing at SCOTUS.

If surviving in business long enough to collect their judgment is a problem for Gibson’s Bakery, is there a way for those of us who support them to send them donations? I’d hate to see Oberlin “win” via “justice delayed is justice denied.”

    jb4 in reply to mitm. | August 9, 2019 at 9:39 pm

    My understanding is that if a plaintiff passes away, his estate is substituted in the legal action. Your idea of supporting Gibson;s is nice. How about ordering something from their online site? Just Google Gibson’s Bakery Oberlin OH to find it.

    How about “Justice delayed is justice waylayed” instead?

Good, hang the college high!
My niece who is Black but was raised in our extended family in the same way as were all the other children. She was completely accepted by our parents which was somewhat surprising but wonderful. She WAS a wonderful, sweet. logical and very smart child who dumped a boyfriend when in high school because he was too pushy about sex; she had the old fashioned idea of saving herself for her husband. Then she went to a liberal arts college and now she is a far left idiot who has had 2 children by her boyfriend.
What I see in my niece angers me and I strongly believe she is a product of leftist indoctrination in college. Time to destroy these institutions, as they now stand, that are destroying the best parts of our American culture

Now that the August 19 deadline to file post-trial motions has come and gone, does anyone know how (or if) Oberlin has responded?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend