Patterico's Pontifications

6/28/2019

Gibson v Oberlin Punitive Damages Reduced, as Expected

Filed under: Court Decisions,Education,Law — DRJ @ 2:34 pm



[Headlines from DRJ]

Hot Air: Judge Reduces Oberlin Damages To $25 Million

But there is a twist:

The president of a school facing a $25 million judgment for aiding student efforts to label Gibson’s Bakery a racist institution is insinuating on a conference call with alumni that Gibson’s is a racist institution. So no lessons learned at Oberlin I guess.

Details at the link.

Last week the Oberlin President reportedly repeated a “false claim” it was “held liable for the speech of its students.”

– DRJ

12 Responses to “Gibson v Oberlin Punitive Damages Reduced, as Expected”

  1. The Trustees meeting will be informative.

    Kevin M (61459c)

  2. The president of a school facing a $25 million judgment for aiding student efforts to label Gibson’s Bakery a racist institution is insinuating on a conference call with alumni that Gibson’s is a racist institution.

    That’s not really an accurate characterization of what she said.

    She said people have reported different experiences with the store and the university isn’t in a position to draw conclusions based on them.

    Dave (1bb933)

  3. I’m an Oberlin Graduate. They Had It Coming.

    https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/06/19/im-an-oberlin-graduate-they-had-it-coming/
    _ _

    The college just cannot believe after self-indoctrination that the white devils could be anything but ignorant, hateful and evil.

    And the msm isn’t helping. Read a mainstream account of what went down at the bakery and many will imply it was an innocent attempt by a couple students to buy wine with a fake ID – ‘I mean who hasn’t? – what they fail to add is that the student attempting to buy had two additional bottles hidden on his person, that when approached about theft that he fled and that at least two of them threatened the employee.

    harkin (58d012)

  4. Oberlin cannot “plead guilty” yet, and that’s what an apology would amount to, because it still has appeals. In fact, the post-trial proceedings are still pending with, among other things, attorneys fees to be determined.

    I’m more perplexed that no judgment was entered against Raimondo. I understand that the plaintiff is entitled to only one recovery, and that the Gibsons will first dig in the deeper pockets of Oberlin under joint and vicarious liability. But Raimondo is not entitled to be let off the hook until the Gibsons have the whole amount in their hands, I would think.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. She said people have reported different experiences with the store and the university isn’t in a position to draw conclusions based on them.

    People have reported different experiences with Communism, too. But there’s a name for those who aren’t in a position to draw conclusions based on them: Communists.

    Kevin M (61459c)

  6. LOL

    Dave (3c40e2)

  7. I don’t hold academia to any higher standard than I hold any other industry whose purpose is to make money off young people, so I’m not particularly outraged or disappointed when they fail to “live up to” some particular principle. I’ve seen them up close, and they taught me better than they intended.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. As Legal Insurrection reported, Dean Raimondo’s liabilities are being absorbed by the college. From the judgment:

    On June 6, 2019, the parties stipulated and agreed that Oberlin College would be vicariously, jointly, and severally liable for any verdict or judgment rendered against Meredith Raimondo, regardless of whether a separate verdict or judgment was entered against Oberlin College.

    Legal Insurrection

    Eliot (32bbca)

  9. I read that, Eliot. Still … is it an election of remedies thing under Ohio law or something? If you want respondeat superior you have to drop your claim against the inferior?

    nk (dbc370)

  10. Speaking of racism….

    MIAMI (AP) — In a story June 27 about the Democratic presidential debate, The Associated Press reported erroneously in some versions that former Vice President Joe Biden worked with Republican segregationist senators. In fact, the senators were Democrats.
    __ _

    harkin (58d012)

  11. This is a civil action not criminal so I am sure the term “double jeopardy” does not apply. Otherwise I’m not sure of anything, so:

    If I recklessly and maliciously make a defamatory fact claim, am sued, and lose; then repeat the claim, are the plaintiffs allowed to sue AGAIN?

    Say for hypothetical instance I call Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dr Michael Mann a burglar. He sues, I lose. May I raise funds telling people that the determination and penalty is, effectively , the burglar stealing even more of my money?

    Pouncer (df6448)

  12. It’s hard to believe that the President of Oberlin has a law degree–surely she understands that the cause of action against the college was defamation, tortious interference with business, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. None of those had anything to do with the students’ free speech. Frankly, had Dean Raimondo not stuck her nose into this, and actively participated in the defamation and other torts, the college would not be looking at a $25 million verdict.

    Rochf (877dba)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2300 secs.