Oberlin Sues Insurers who Denied Coverage for Gibson Case

[Anonymous]

There was a thread about this last year in which some dismissed the idea that a Oberlin would have to pay the $36.5 million Gibson judgment out of pocket. Looks like they paid all but $1 million of their own legal expenses, as well. Turns out all four of their insurers have denied coverage. Which was not surprising, as insurance rarely covers intentional torts.

https://chroniclet.com/news/361165/oberlin-college-sues-4-insurance-companies-over-gibsons-bakery-settlement/

[Anonymous]

Interesting, thank you for sharing.

[Anonymous]

Good. Glad they had to pay.

[Anonymous]

Oberlin must have the worst legal team. Wouldn't they have written statements by the insurance company that they would or would not pay? Also, Oberlin could have just apologized! Why didn't their lawyers tell them to apologize!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oberlin must have the worst legal team. Wouldn't they have written statements by the insurance company that they would or would not pay? Also, Oberlin could have just apologized! Why didn't their lawyers tell them to apologize!

Then how would they be speaking TRUTH TO POWER? They would essentially be admitting the oppressors were right and that the oppressed students were wrong. And we can’t have that.

[Anonymous]

Based on the Gibson Bakery incident, Oberlin College is run and advised by idiots.

If Oberlin were based in San Francisco, then the school's actions would have been understandable, but still wrong.

This is one case where almost everyone is cheering for the insurance companies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. Glad they had to pay.

+1

[Anonymous]

Wasn’t this exact same insurance situation a plot line on “The Good Fight”?

[Anonymous]

They must be desperate for cash if they want to remind everyone about this story

[Anonymous]

And they're fighting to try and make the insurers pay. They just can't stop being garbage human beings!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on the Gibson Bakery incident, Oberlin College is run and advised by idiots.

If Oberlin were based in San Francisco, then the school's actions would have been understandable, but still wrong.

This is one case where almost everyone is cheering for the insurance companies.

They aren’t idiots. They are narcissists. I suspect they are still angry and confused over why the imaginary reality they constructed didn’t turn out to be true, because like true narcissists they constructed a complex imaginary world where they were the victims. I’m sure they are angry and confused as to why the bakery fought back.

San Francisco just recalled school board members of the same ilk. I wouldn’t bet that SF would tolerate this blinding narcissism better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the Gibson Bakery incident, Oberlin College is run and advised by idiots.

If Oberlin were based in San Francisco, then the school's actions would have been understandable, but still wrong.

This is one case where almost everyone is cheering for the insurance companies.

They aren’t idiots. They are narcissists. I suspect they are still angry and confused over why the imaginary reality they constructed didn’t turn out to be true, because like true narcissists they constructed a complex imaginary world where they were the victims. I’m sure they are angry and confused as to why the bakery fought back.

San Francisco just recalled school board members of the same ilk. I wouldn’t bet that SF would tolerate this blinding narcissism better.

I wrote the post to which you responded. Thank you.

I really like your post & enjoy reading your thoughts.

SERIOUS QUESTION: Can one be both an idiot & a narcissist under your well thought-out definition ? TIA

I don't think that these qualities are mutually exclusive, but I live near a narcissist and--until recently--have never dealt with one before. He is very intelligent, but also intensely vindictive about imaginary wrongs. I ask because you seem to understand better than I.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the Gibson Bakery incident, Oberlin College is run and advised by idiots.

If Oberlin were based in San Francisco, then the school's actions would have been understandable, but still wrong.

This is one case where almost everyone is cheering for the insurance companies.

They aren’t idiots. They are narcissists. I suspect they are still angry and confused over why the imaginary reality they constructed didn’t turn out to be true, because like true narcissists they constructed a complex imaginary world where they were the victims. I’m sure they are angry and confused as to why the bakery fought back.

San Francisco just recalled school board members of the same ilk. I wouldn’t bet that SF would tolerate this blinding narcissism better.

I wrote the post to which you responded. Thank you.

I really like your post & enjoy reading your thoughts.

SERIOUS QUESTION: Can one be both an idiot & a narcissist under your well thought-out definition ? TIA

I don't think that these qualities are mutually exclusive, but I live near a narcissist and--until recently--have never dealt with one before. He is very intelligent, but also intensely vindictive about imaginary wrongs. I ask because you seem to understand better than I.

This is often true - narcissists, by definition, do not admit they are wrong. They also often believe they are more intelligent than they are, in reality. A narcissists reality is different from yours and mine. DP here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't they have written statements by the insurance company that they would or would not pay?

I only know the broad outlines of this case, so grain of salt. But a lot of times, the plaintiff will throw the kitchen sink at the defendant in terms of an array of claims. Maybe one or two of the claims are potentially covered even if the bulk of the claims are for alleged actions that aren't covered. So, the insurer will defend under a reservation of rights. They have a good faith obligation to provide a defense but do so without waiving their right to deny coverage depending on the facts that come out in litigation or the conclusions reached by a jury.

It sounds like the insurer has concluded that the verdict and judgment were based on acts or omissions by Oberlin that weren't covered under the various insurance agreements.

[Anonymous]

I genuinely can’t believe they want this in the news again. My teen is prime oberlin applicant material but wouldn’t consider applying bc of this. Not saying it’s that was the right call (it’s a good school where you can get a great education) but it is teens who are deciding or not to apply there and they are do clearly in the wrong here and so repeatedly refusing off ramps that it makes the whole admin suspect in terms of judgement.