Oberlin College has
an eight-figure problem:
A Lorain County jury awarded Gibson’s Bakery $33 million in punitive damages in a case against Oberlin College on Thursday bringing the total damages in the case to more than $40 million.
The jury found the the college and Vice President and Dean of Students Meredith Raimondo liable on three different counts last Friday, awarding more than $11 million in actual damages.
The counts were:
- Defamation - Oberlin College and Raimondo were found liable
- Infliction of intentional emotional distress - Oberlin College was found liable
- Intentional interference of business relationships - Raimondo was found liable
$44 million is a huge sum, even for a school with an endowment of over $850 million. Oberlin is going to keep fighting, apparently. From the linked article in the Cleveland Plain Dealer:
Oberlin College President Carmen Twillie Ambar in a letter to the campus community on Friday expressed dissatisfaction with the jury’s decision, and signaled the college plans to appeal its findings.
“Let me be absolutely clear: This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process,” Twillie Ambar said. “We are disappointed in the jury’s decisions and the fragmentary and sometimes distorted public discussion of this case. But we respect the integrity of the jury, and we value our relationship with the town and region that are our home.”
While the first rule of holes applies in this case, I get it -- it's likely the punitive damage award will be reduced on appeal, but the chances of getting the case thrown out entirely are about nil. The facts of the case aren't good for Oberlin:
The case filed in 2017 stemmed from Oberlin and Raimondo’s conduct after a string of student protests outside the bakery where protesters called the owners racist.
Three black students were arrested in 2016 after one tried to use a fake ID and shoplifted from the bakery, according to the Chronicle-Telegram. The owner’s son, who is white, followed the students and got into a fight with them.
Soon after, students protested outside of the bakery to the extent where local police testified that they considered pulling in outside help.
Protest might be soft-pedaling things a bit. Legal Insurrection
adds some context:
After the initial protest that said Gibson’s was racist, Oberlin College did nothing to put out the fire, and in fact added to it. That is more than likely what made the jury think they school had acted with “malice’ toward Gibson’s, the primary piece of the punitive damage puzzle. Rather than put out a statement that Gibson’s was not racist, the school put out a letter on Nov. 11 from the school president and the dean of students that said, “Regarding the incident at Gibson’s, we are deeply troubled because we have heard from students that there is more to the story than what has been generally reported. We will commit every resource to determining the full and true narrative, including exploring whether this is a pattern and not an isolated incident.”
That statement was not part of the defamation claim, but set a tone of indifference. And it was that indifference by the school, plus emails and texts that showed vitriolic attitude in them, that perhaps caused the jury to go very high on the punitive damages.
According to the evidence presented, the school never did determine “any full and true narrative” and found out as most everyone in the community knew, that the Gibsons had never had and history of racism on any kind. But the school still cut the business off from its cafeteria delivery business (bagels, pastries and pizza dough). Students stopped shopping at the store. Revenues dropped by a huge amount (from about $900,000 in 2016 down to about $500,000 in 2018) and Oberlin College never did anything to rectify the situation.
Of course. Facts aren't important in a narrative-driven world. And even now, the facts don't matter on the Oberlin campus:
The damage was worse than most realize. On a walk through campus several weekends ago, this reporter talked to about 20 students at random on campus, and every one of them said they would never shop at Gibson’s because the business and family are racist. When shown the police reports and the fact that the three shoplifters plead guilty and claimed “no racial profiling” was involved, most of the students I spoke with said, “Cops lie.”
Do cops lie? Some do. But SJWs lie as well. And that's the crux here. The town of Oberlin has less than 10,000 citizens. Oberlin College is the center of the community. And it's been a lefty enclave forever. But there's a difference between conventional liberalism and the the SJW lunacy emanating from college campuses these days. Back to Legal Insurrection:
But in the end, this was. a case that will be one that is pointed to as a “tipping point” of sorts. [Plaintiff attorney Lee] Plakas repeatedly told the jury that this was bigger than them, and that they could make a statement to the country “that this type of behavior is unacceptable to any community because a big collegiate institution like Oberlin College has a responsibility to their community and neighbors, and not just to themselves.”
The message has to send a shudder through other liberal arts colleges, especially ones less well-heeled than Oberlin. My alma mater, Beloit College, has an endowment about 1/4th of Oberlin's. If Beloit were hit with an 8-figure judgment, the college would probably end up closing its doors. A similar result would put every other liberal arts college in Wisconsin out of business as well. The saying is, "get woke, go broke." The pathology of totalitarian thinking can survive on campus, but for the moment the real world isn't having it.
4 comments:
Nice summary. A couple of points that have struck me during the coverage by Legal Insurrection's reporter Daniel McGraw was the tone-deaf nature of the defense and the administration's choice to side with the shop-lifters.
From belittling the worth of Gibson's bakery to the blast e-mails following both the initial verdict and the punitive damages verdict, the college has shown little understanding of their choices with regard to the community.
I don't recall whether it was Jacobson or McGraw who summed up the administration was more afraid of what the students would do than what the community needed, as noted in this exchange from the trial:
“The concern was that the students were angry?” Gibson lawyer Lee Plakas asked. “The fear was that angry students would throw food [made by Gibson’s] on the floor [of the cafeteria] and stomp on it?”
“Yes, that was one of the concerns,” Protzman answered.
“Doesn’t that sound more like a nursery school than a college?” Plakas continued.
“Nursery school students do throw food on the floor, yes,” Protzman said."
Protzman then went on to say since the school wasn't the students' parents they didn't have the right to make them behave like adults are expected to behave.
I can only shake my head at such stupidity. For me, it really sums up the thinking of educators who have created an entitled generation. No one has personal accountability.
On the bright side, there is every indication the Insurance Company will deny coverage based on the administration's support of the whole affair, and if Oberlin wants to get them to pay it will require them to sue the company and incur more legal debt.
“Doesn’t that sound more like a nursery school than a college?” Plakas continued.
exactly.
there is too much of this is what we call 'higher education'.
In '78 I found I needed to drop a college class I'd enrolled in. It was the fall that I'd had my first knee surgery and was on crutches, and the class was immediately after another class and on the other side of the campus; not a trek I wanted to keep making 3 times a week. I thought it would be simple to drop the class, but it took a lot of paperwork and a meeting with the Dean. I asked him in the meeting why this was so complicated, and he cited the University's responsibilities "en loco parentis" to make sure proper consideration was being given.
I guess the Oberlin situation is due to people not studying Latin anymore.
I asked him in the meeting why this was so complicated, and he cited the University's responsibilities "en loco parentis" to make sure proper consideration was being given.
I guess the Oberlin situation is due to people not studying Latin anymore.
They've got the "loco" part down pat, to be certain.
Post a Comment