The appellate court took a long time! Many expected this result. Hope the Oberlin trustees and admin come to their senses and settle this case, something long over due (IMO of course).
Hereâs the initial CC thread on the case: Oberlin ex-Pres. "Oberlin needs an intervention. STOP. Pay up, apologize to the Gibsons, reflect.."
Thankful for whomever is responsible reposting about this fiasco. Good reminder as to why we wonât be applying to Oberlin.
At least part of the delay might have been related to the pandemic.
I remember the previous thread, and am very glad the original verdict was upheld.
Costly Dean of students left last year to go to Oglethorpe.
This âfiascoâ will reverberate across the country in all colleges and universities. This is a story about who is responsible for non-College sanctioned activism. Sigh. I donât live far away from UC Berkeley. Thatâs the school where Vietnam student activism gave rise to then-Gov. Reagan to start charging tuition for a University of California education. Seriously. The UCs were free, once upon a time.
I have no idea why Oberlin decided to appeal it, except that when it made the choice, the SCOTUS wasnât packed with conservative judges. Honestly, this is a case that could (or could have) climbed to the Supreme Court.
My kid will be attending Oberlin fall 2022. He is like his mama, left-leaning but not far-left. Living where we live has made him sensible given all the far-left messes that have happened. We live in San Francisco. We still vote Blue but we are sensible. He will probably be a good person to help others bridge an understanding to overly woke politics that lead to this type of activism and is found at ALL American colleges and universities today. He totally understands it.
Um, itâs a defamation suit. Perhaps the state supreme court but highly doubt it rises to any court beyond that (or, assuming Oberlin would even attempt it, that any federal district will take up the matter). There is no constitutional protection for defamation.
Like jbstillflying said, this is a defamation lawsuitâŠit has nothing to do with free speech. What reverberations are you expecting? Regardless, donât you think they would have already happened when Oberlin lost the initial case several years ago?
Itâs not totally correct to say that the case had ânothing to do with free speech.â The appellate court directly addressed the issue of free speech concerns in paragraph 25:
Oberlin has asserted throughout this case, as have several organizations through amicus briefs on appeal, that any liability for defamation in this case could have a chilling effect on studentsâ rights to free speech at colleges and universities across the country. This Court must emphasize, however, that Oberlin was granted summary judgment on the Gibsonsâ claims based on the verbal protests by Oberlin students. The trial court agreed that the student chants and verbal protests about the Gibsons being racists were protected by the First Amendment and, therefore, were not actionable in this case. By the time of trial, the Gibsonsâ libel claim focused solely on whether Oberlin had disseminated false, written statements of fact that caused the Gibsons significant harm.
(https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/9/2022/2022-Ohio-1079.pdf)
Iâm not sure I understand your pointâŠ.the court clearly stated that the studentsâ actions were protected by the First AmendmentâŠand that free speech was not a part of the case they were ruling on. The case was this piece of what you quoted:
Weâre probably quibbling over semantics here. I took issue with your saying the case had ânothing to doâ with free speech. I think itâs more accurate to say that the college and its supporters lost on the issue of free speech.
Look at the last page of the decision and the list of counsel for the organizations that filed amicus briefs, including the NAACP, the National Coalition Against Censorship, the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, the American Booksellers Association and 19 Media Organizations, etc. The court rejected their arguments. Iâm just making the point that free speech issues were vigorously asserted by the college and amici.
As this article in WaPo says, colleges canât assume that free speech considerations will protect them from the potential for incurring a costly libel judgment. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/colleges-should-pay-heedto-oberlins-costly-libel-case/2022/04/07/04c251fe-b680-11ec-8358-20aa16355fb4_story.html
The appellate court rejected the arguments/briefs because the right to free speech of the students was never the issue in this case, and the various briefs didnât really understand that. Which is probably why the appellate court addressed the issue in their decision, basically saying âwhy are people sending us free speech briefs, when thatâs not at issue in this case?â Itâs a defamation case and libel isnât free speech.
Some select passages from the article you linked (the whole thing is a good summary):
From the standpoint of the law, these activities were, the appellate court held, sufficient to treat Oberlin as having âpublishedââ that is, repeated â the false and defamatory claim in the flyer. To make matters worse for the college, the student senate passed a resolution that repeated some version of the accusations. A copy of the resolution was posted in a display case in a university building.
The court held that the jury could have attributed these actions to the college, another basis for holding it liable for defamation. What was more, the jury heard evidence that Raimondo interfered with the business relationship between the collegeâs caterer and the bakery when she told the caterer not to buy its goods. The jury then determined economic and punitive damages, and the trial court awarded attorneysâ fees to the bakery. All this matters tremendously to other colleges and universities, especially liberal arts colleges where students and faculty tend to be left-leaning and protests are not uncommon. The idea that a few copies of a flyer being handed out by an administrator plus a student senate resolution could translate into millions of dollars of damages seems astonishing on its face. Itâs a stark reminder that college employees acting in the course of their jobs can put the school into substantial legal jeopardy.
From a First Amendment standpoint, you might think the loose language of the flyer would deserve protection. But as a matter of First Amendment law, libel isnât free speech. And if youâre libeling a private citizen, not a public figure, itâs no defense that you acted without malice. If your statement was false and defamatory, you are liable â full stop.
@jbstillflying is an attorney and can probable better explain this than I
Correction - not an attorney. But âFree Speechâ was simply not the relevant matter being litigated, and that Oberlin even attempted to appeal on those grounds demonstrates a poor understanding of the First Amendment. Neither Oberlin nor any institution or person has a protected right to defame. Defamation laws are on the books of every state, and while the standard of proof for the plaintiff is usually pretty high and requires a clear pattern of facts pointing to a deliberate malicious act, the Gibsons and their legal team were able to meet that standard in the state of OH.
There will also be no âchilling effect on free speechâ as predicted by Oberlin in its appeal. Itâs true that college students and faculty have had to sue to make sure their free speech rights were protected; however, those have typically been lawsuits against public institutions accused of restricting those rights. Completely different situation. But that it might, going forward, put the hammer down on some run-amok college administrators with a misguided agenda? One can only hope!
Today the Ohio Supreme Court rejected Oberlinâs appeal. In theory, and I cannot believe Oberlin would attempt to try this, they could appeal to the US Supreme Court where their chances would be near zero. Moreover, they have nearly zero chance of obtaining a stay of judgment pending the appeal. If Oberlin tries such a stunt, then their administration should go. But that wonât happen.
I doubt Oberlin will pay quickly or easily. Not a smart move with the interest clock ticking.
So where does this leave Oberlin? With interest accruing, they must pay a $44M dollar judgment. This certainly impacts the school, and its endowment.
I have been watching this case for some time and this outcome frankly was predictable. If there was a line in Vegas on this I easily would have thrown a few thousand at the bet. Outsiders certainly could see it far more easily than Oberlin administrators. This case should have been settled long ago. One commentator noted that this case is what happens when an elite, narrow minded and out-of-touch population runs up against the values of the working class. Of course this upsets people but the outcome speaks volumes.
I went to two elitist schools undergrad and grad - with so-called much more prestige than Oberlin. I was very poor, and went to both schools with a combination of a D1 athletic scholarship and a job with the Teamsters and some savvy investing and saving, Not a guy to take out loans. I was surprised at how out of touch most students and staff at these elite places were with working class people. (I though they were soft, too, but that was not a fair judgment - I was a tough kid and really lived it to a bit of an excess). They used to speak on their behalf but never worked a challenging union job a day in their lives. Everything at Oberlin was about a narrative and not focused on the real lived experiences of working people. The value system is completely off kilter. If I went to Oberlin, I would have viewed the workers at Gibsonâs as my friends - these type of people make the world run - including the African American gentleman who worked for Gibsonâs and moved from Cleveland to have a better life for his daughter. A hero in my book. My working class friends - I was without a father - pushed the heck out of me to finish college and grad school - true friends - they wanted me to have a better life. My single mother riven with poverty believed that how you treat working class people speaks volumes. If one of my classmates stole from my friends and then threatened that friend, I wouldnât be calling for the criminal justice system to overly punish them but I sure as heck wouldnât be raising a protest on their behalf. Stealing from hard working people and assaulting them is simply wrong, and again, something is wrong with the culture at Oberlin. And the foolishness of bringing race into this - the kids who stole knew better and it is offensive to think they were not perfectly capable of making sound choices, no matter their race. They admitted so themselves. Anyone with any sense would have chalked their conduct up to youthful stupidity, hardly a rare occurrence. Only in the eyes of the apparatchiks could a bakery in Oberlin with a decades long record of serving the community be deemed as the epicenter of racism.
Nope, the previous judge reduced the judgment to $25M. Oberlin also must pay Gibsonsâ legal fees of $6M.
Regardless, I sure hope Oberlin does not appeal to the US Supreme Court, pays the money, and moves forward.
Turns out the real figure is $36M - $25M judgment plus $5M in interest (which will likely grow given that Oberlin will continue to delay) plus $6M in attorneys fees. Not cheap.
Do you have a source for this statement?
Legal Insurrection - admittedly a conservative site - has the numerical breakdown. They have been on this story from the get go, and I tend not to be swayed by their biases and glean the facts. I should have checked there before posting initially. In the comments section, there is a poster who is obviously familiar with bankruptcy law and who discusses the possibility of a Chapter 11 filing. He thinks that with a $36M dollar debt, the school could enter bankruptcy given its $180M operating budget and the harm that paying the judgment could cause the school (there are assumptions embedded in the thinking regarding the relative lack of liquidity in the endowment funds). Of course, Chapter 11 is not a free lunch and the school would have to pay something. Query what terms financial institutions have on the school and its lending arrangements, if any. A lot to chew on, but I found the Chapter 11 colloquy fascinating. From a public relations perspective, Chapter 11 would be a disaster (but I could be wrong) as a school in bankruptcy is hardly a place in an era with declining eligible students where students would choose to go, especially since the damages were self inflicted. Query whether the school will or can borrow to pay the judgment and costs. Oberlin provides a fine education and I cannot believe the administrators chose to damage its brand this way. Their has to be an inner voice in the heads of the administration that they have not handled this well.
Skeptical of the bk route. Obie has a $950m endowment. (yeah, I get taht much of that money comes with restrictions, but its hard to believe a Judge would buy the âwe donât even have $1 billion in the bank, so we are borderline out of businessâ story.