Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College


Just being a fly in the ointment...
PREMO Member
Ohio jury dings Oberlin College for $33 million in punitive damages over anti-bakery protests

An Ohio jury awarded Thursday a maximum $33 million in punitive damages to a local bakery targeted by Oberlin College protesters, triple the $11 million in compensatory damages announced in last week’s verdict.



PREMO Member
Legal Insurrection: Oberlin College ‘basically begged for mercy’ after being hit with $11 million verdict

Oberlin College — where students accuse the cafeteria of selling them culturally “disrespectful” food, demand black-only “safe spaces,” and have classes canceled after a student wrapped in a blanket was confused for a Klansman — was begging for mercy in court after it was ordered to pay $11 million in damages to a local family business that students tried to destroy.

The College that said Gibson's Bakery was ONLY Worth the COST 1/2 Semester @ Oberlin


Power with Control
So I followed the article link about the list of demands a student group sent to the college. Had this gem in there....

This institution functions on the premises of imperialism, white supremacy, capitalism, ableism, and a cissexist heteropatriarchy.
Yet here you are, dumping tens of thousands of dollar into it........

All this makes we wonder if theres room in the market for a "Universtiy of Hard Knocks".

"Parents? Worried about spending 20-30K for the first year of Timmys Fine Arts degree only to find out he really couldnt give a poo past the first semester? Our Pass or GTFO policy ensures he wont waste more than one semester of your money. Lack of attendance or grades below XX means it's Keep Up or Get Out here at Ol' UHK. More worried he'll spend 50-80K of your money or tax money and actualy get that Fine Arts degree and never pay it back? Not here, we dont offer degrees in any field of endeavor that doesnt show a decent chance of gainful employment in field. We've replaced those with trades courses that have high employment chances. First year requirements include a series of general llife skills that expose the students to Lessons for Life (tm) that teaches finiacial responsibility, basic automotive knoweldge and repair, home repair, shopping skills and sundry. All modules may be tested out of by students whose parents actually pepared them for life away from home. Every job on campus other than instructional ones are open to student employees which brings a tuition discount"


PREMO Member
Oberlin denied a new trial in the Gibson’s Bakery case

In the Gibson’s Bakery v. Oberlin College case, the judgment for the plaintiffs amounted to almost $32 million in damages and defendants were required to post a $36 million bond to secure the judgment pending appeal.

Before appealing, Oberlin College filed two post-trial motions, a Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict (pdf.) and Motion for a New Trial (pdf.), as explained in our post, Oberlin College Seeks New Trial in Gibson’s Bakery Case.

Gibson’s Bakery responded with an Opposition to the Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict (pdf.), and Opposition to the Motion for a New Trial (pdf.), as explained in our post, Gibson’s Bakery: Oberlin College’s request for a new trial is “baseless”.

Judge John Miraldi has ruled, denying both motions. The Order Denying Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (pdf.) and Order Denying Motion for New Trial (pdf.) are embedded at the bottom of the post.

In the JNOV Order, the Court ruled in pertinent part:
Judgment notwithstanding the verdict is only appropriate where, when the evidence is construed most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, reasonable minds can come to one conclusion, and that conclusion is adverse to the non-moving party. See McMichael v. Akron General Medical Center, 2017-Ohio-7594, ,r 1 O (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist.); see a/so Goodrich, at ¶ 11.
The Court has reviewed and considered the parties’ respective briefs and applicable precedent and, after construing the evidence most strongly in Plaintiff’s favor, the Court does not find that the Defendants are entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is denied.