Forum Index
»
College and University Discussion
Oberlin loses Gibson lawsuit appeal
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
This. So glad it was widely reported on. What an embarrassment. |
Anonymous
FALSE. It started Nov 6, 2016 almost a year and a quarter before the Trump admkk ok n sound even commence. I’m not a Trumper but your attempts to attach blame to tge Trump admin for EVERYTHING is hilarious! The college acted badly and now has to pay. Don’t provide it with excuses! |
Anonymous
|
). I agree that the facts are all a little odd, including what seemed like the store employees using a little self-help in using force against the student, and a fairly clueless administrator of student life (who was also a faculty member, and if tenured may be why it took a few years for her to get out of Oberlin). But the actual law is on Oberlin's side (despite the jury and local judge and appellate panel), and the amount of damages and attorney's fees is pretty nuts. I agree that it shows more what people in the surrounding county feel about the college in their midst, than it does about either the claim or the underlying law. Ultimately, it will be reversed. And even if not, insurance will cover it. And if for some reason that doesn't happen, the very big endowment can gain more than 30M in a few months in this market.
Anonymous
Well said. The honorable thing for Oberlin to have done is to apologize to Gibson's and explain to their student body that what they (Oberlin) did was completely wrong and unacceptable. I might have just a shred of respect for this school had they owned up to their gross behavior years ago. However, they did exactly the opposite; actions have consequences. |
Anonymous
They probably would never have had to pay had they behaved like decent human beings from the get-go. |
Anonymous
Precisely this. |
Anonymous
“This” isn’t even in English: admkk ok n sound? But their math is off. Trump was elected 11/8/2016. The event at Gibsons happened the next day— 11/9/2016. As you may remember, the national rhetoric was very ugly. It was not 1.25 after Trump was elected. |
Anonymous
Oh, sweet pea. You have no idea what you are talking about. |
Anonymous
And yet it doesn’t seem to be affecting applications or admissions. |
Anonymous
Oh, honey bunch. It seems the appeals court disagrees with you. Sorry the fact that Oberlin was completely in the wrong is triggering for you. Be well! |
Anonymous
Um, go back and look at the dates and timeline in that post you were praising. |
Anonymous
Trump wasn’t put into office until late Jan 2017. His election had nothing to do with a college student who stole from a bakery on Nov 6 2016. Nothing. Every time one of you mentions Trump I stop reading and move on to the next comment because you lose credibility. It’s over. Grow up. |
Anonymous
DP. Reading comprehension is a good thing. You should try it sometime. |
Anonymous
Perhaps you slept through the 2016 election? Trump’ election had everything to do with emboldening racists (and the FB post that came out on appeal proved that the Gibson grandson was incredibly racist), making liberals angry and making Trumpkins revel in liberal tears. There was such a strong backlash because the mood in the college and community was so toxic. Almost any other day, and this incident doesn’t spiral so out of control. Even after the 2020 election it wasn’t bad— although kids stuck close to campus. My kid had a guy get in his face in the grocery store the day after the election and call him a “f—king faggot”. But the school now does mandatory bystander and deescalation training for student. And my kid is 6 feet tall and in decent shape, so he walked away. |
Anonymous
“Certain litigator” here. Lots of erroneous assumptions here from people who don’t understand how insurance works. Oberlin may not have insurance coverage for this, as the company who holds the umbrella policy has disclaimed coverage for everything except (maybe) the libel coverage. In fact, far from controlling the case, the insurance company tried to intervene because Oberlin was refusing to even share information about their pleadings with them or allow them input on jury interrogatories. Oberlin appears to have an underlying general liability policy, but those usually don’t cover liability for mistakes by administrators, and “errors and omissions” policies generally cover just that — mistakes and negligence. Like the umbrella policy, they generally do not cover intentional misconduct or willful torts. Also looks like the underlying policy has a $1 million cap on damages (not clear if they mean punitive or everything). in any case. Based on the court filings, the article below concludes that it’s likely Oberlin will need to pay out of pocket and sue their insurers (not to mention their insurance coverage don’t appear to be very robust). https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/exclusive-oberlin-college-insurer-likely-to-reject-coverage-for-gibson-bakery-11-million-verdict/amp/ The motion then sets forth the history of Lexington fighting with Oberlin College as to insurance coverage: After tender of the lawsuit, Lexington informed the defendants that the Lexington policy did not respond to certain claims in the lawsuit. In particular, based on the claims that remain in the lawsuit, Lexington advised that the Lexington policy only potentially responds to the libel claim, . but that the Lexington policy is excess to other insurance provided through a commercial general liability policy issued by College Risk Retention Group, Inc. (“CRRG”) and an Educator’s Liability policy issued by United Educators (“UE”) in relation to the libel claim. Lexington further advised that the Lexington policy only embraces punitive damages when assessed relative to covered compensatory damages that implicate the Lexington layer of coverage. (Affidavit of Patrick Fredette (“Fredette Aff. ‘), ,r 3). In this regard, Lexington’s coverage, if any, is also excess to the UE policy not simply for any covered liability arising out of the libel claim, if any, but also any covered punitive damage award, subject to the $1 million cap in the UE policy for such damages. (Id.). |