You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Land of the Free
Oberlin College ordered to post $36M bond in case against Gibson's Bakery
2019-07-27
[CHRONICLET] Lorain County Common Pleas Judge John Miraldi has ordered Oberlin College to post a $36 million appeal bond before he stays execution of the multimillion-dollar judgment recently won against the college by Gibson’s Bakery and the Gibson family.

Attorneys for the Gibsons had requested the college post a bond worth $36,367,711.56, representing the total amount of judgments against the college, plus interest, awarded by a jury and Miraldi following a six-week trial that lasted from late May into early June.

Such bonds are known as supersedeas or appeal bonds and allow defendants in a suit to delay paying the judgment ordered against them until they have exhausted all their appeals. Oberlin College attorneys said in court they intend to appeal but have declined further comment on the matter outside court.

Attorneys for Oberlin College had asked the judge to not immediately order their client to pay the $25 million in compensatory and punitive damages awarded at the conclusion of the case, saying they anticipated filing additional post-trial motions. They also asked him not to enforce a bond, a request attorneys for the Gibsons had opposed.

Miraldi ruled Thursday that Ohio law gives him "great discretion in determining what conditions, if any, are proper to grant a stay of execution of the judgment and to afford security to the Plaintiffs."

There are conditions to Miraldi’s order: He ordered Oberlin College to post the bond by Wednesday, July 31, in order to stay judgment until Aug. 19. Failure to post the bond, he wrote in his decision, will result in the stay of judgment being lifted.

Miraldi also gave Oberlin College until Aug. 19 to file post-trial motions if they wish to extend the stay of judgment further, to Sept. 9.

Attorneys for the Gibsons will have 14 days from Aug. 19 to respond to Oberlin College’s motions. Miraldi wrote that he would rule on Oberlin College’s motions by Sept. 9.

Posted by:Fred

#7  USN,Ret.: it would be interesting to dive into the mailbag and read letters from alumni

See pp. 48-55 from the plaintiffs' attorneys' "FAQ" doc linked in my comment above.

It shows four letters to Oberlin's president which where introduced as evidence at trial. These include two letters from alumni and two from Oberlin residents expressing their disgust and anger at the College's actions in trying to bully and extort from the Gibsons.

These emails are contained within internal Oberlin administrators' email threads and are preceded by the nasty, malicious and vulgar interval back-and-forth of Oberlin's leadership in which hurl F-bombs at the Gibsons for their "arrogance" in daring to defy false charges of racism.

The Oberlin leaders also discuss plans to use threats of cutting off the Gibsons from Oberlin's purchasing spend in order to coerce the Gibsons into not prosecuting the many Oberlin student shoplifters who repeatedly try to rip them off and also dropping the defamation lawsuit.

The multi-million $$$ judgment rendered by the court against Oberlin was for not only defamation but also tortious interference in the Gibsons' business.




Posted by: Varmint Speaking for Boskone9741   2019-07-27 18:08  

#6  ...Something to keep in mind - Oberlin swears that they only have about $60M USD available, and that a $36M USD bond (and add 5-7M USD to that for fees and costs, so you're possibly as high as $43M USD by the time it's done) would break them.

It appears that their insurers are digging in their heels about paying for anything (they don't have to pay at all on defamation judgements) and though they may have nearly a billion dollar endowment; there tend to be very, very strict limits on how that money can be used.

So IF they're telling the truth, they're toast - and if they're lying, it'll become real clear real fast.

Either way, I'm happy. I grew up a few miles north in Lorain, and believe me when I tell you that the only thing greater than the hate the college has for the townies is the hate the townies have for the college. This is a Berserkley - I mean, Berkeley-level academic asylum in the middle of the very definition of rural America.

And the townies have been waiting for this for a long, loooooooooooooong time. Whatever benefits they've gotten from the college have long since been passed by the cost of having to deal with them. And this isn't an East/West coast liberal judge laying down the bond requirement - if it were, the verdict probably would have been disallowed in the first place - this is a Democrat from an area where most Democrats would be considered Republicans in most other places.

Oberlin got too smart for its own good and forgot where it was - living in a bubble will do that for you. The best case scenario for them right now is a massive financial hit combined with a substantial drop in enrollment, the worst case is a bankruptcy. Either way, Oberlin College is about to perform the greatest service in its history:

Being a bad example.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2019-07-27 11:59  

#5  ...depends upon how big of a base they've indoctrinated over the last couple decades. Got to remember a lot of diversity offices and officers popped up in that time frame. This is a big 'victim'* card to play to that audience.

* as in the plea for leniency because one is an orphan, after murdering their parents.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2019-07-27 11:19  

#4  it would be interesting to dive into the mailbag and read letters from alumni as well as whatever the school is sending out.
suspect huge drop in incoming funds.
Posted by: USN,Ret.   2019-07-27 10:21  

#3  It's a good thing there's no insanity defense in civil cases...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-07-27 08:32  

#2  A long post, but necessary.

Ambar's blatant lies and through-the-looking-glass denials of reality are so disgusting that they deserve to be demolished with specific evidence presented at trial.

That voluminous body of evidence in the form of many emails and text messages that Oberlin College high-level staff sent each other - and even to the president of Oberlin at that time, Marvin Krislov - shows beyond a doubt that not just Oberlin students but Oberlin's LEADERSHIP behaved with actual malice toward the Gibsons.

This malice took the form of an urgent desire, which these Oberlin leaders acted upon, to try to bully and punish the Gibsons for daring to resist Oberlin College employees' and students' false charges of racism.

Everyone should read the detailed, precise and superbly well-organized recitation of the facts by the Gibsons' attorneys' here's the link: https://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/FAQs-re-Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College.pdf.

Oberlin College President's Big Lie #1. "There was one administrator there who was representing the institution ... the dean of students ... was there to ensure that the protest was lawful and was safe, and was saying to students 'you can't stand there, you can't stand there.'"

Oberlin College President's Big Lie #2. "There's no doubt that the college felt bad about what was happening and tried to resolve it."

FACT: Evidence presented at trial shows clearly that Oberlin staff were anything but neutral. There were dozens of examples of actual malicious intent and active behavior to stir up the students against the Gibsons.
From Lee Plakas et al.'s "FAQ", find specific evidence to specific questions in the following pages of the FAQ:
1. Did Oberlin College and Dean Raimondo act with actual malice? .............3
2. What led the jury to conclude that Oberlin College and Dean Raimondo acted with
actual malice? ....................... 4
3. Did Oberlin College interfere with a 100-year business relationship without
justification and support, by its words or actions, a boycott against Gibson’s Bakery? ........................ 8
4. Did the Oberlin College administration fail to act as the adult in the room and instead succumb to the threat of students throwing nursery-school like temper tantrums in the school dining halls? ...........................11
5. Did Oberlin College insist that its students were above the law and entitled to special treatment? ......................................... 13
6. Did the College recklessly disregard the truth that the Gibsons do not have a history
of racial profiling or racial discrimination? .......................................17
7. Did Oberlin College take any action or make any efforts to correct the false narrative
calling the Gibsons racists?...............................................................................................22
Posted by: Lex   2019-07-27 07:57  

#1  Completely utterly shameful.

From the plaintiffs' i.e. the Gibsons' attorneys, here's an extremely detailed and precise recitation of the evidence presented at trial - evidence of Oberlin College senior leaders' and administrators' actual malice toward and tortious interference of the Gibsons and their business. It's devastating:

http://www.lawlion.com/faqs-re-gibsons-bakery-v-oberlin-college/
Posted by: Lex   2019-07-27 01:58  

00:00