Will I Ever See the $36 Million Oberlin College Owes Me? My family was falsely accused of racism by a powerful school in a small town. Our business was destroyed. We won our case. But the school is refusing to pay. "Instead, the school proposed a deal where, in the future, if a student were caught shoplifting, we’d call the dean instead of the police. My husband and his dad believe firmly that everyone should be treated equally, so they refused. Eventually, in 2017, we felt that we had no choice other than filing a lawsuit against Oberlin (for libel, among other things) because David’s 89-year-old father, who had dedicated his life to the business, did not want to die being falsely branded a racist."
They got mad their store got boycotted and sued a school for millions of dollars? That's ridiculous. I remember when people used to think frivolous lawsuits were bad.
The first thing that stuck out to me was the son chasing the shoplifter and trying to accost him. Nothing was going to go well after that. Don't have an opinion on what happened after that since I don't know the other side of the story. I have all the respect in the world for Oberlin and would be very disappointed if that family's side of the story turns out to be true.
It's already been decided, Again, 3 different courts sided with the family. I would agree, chasing the shoplifter was not a smart thing to do. Any store in this day and age better have security cameras all over their place.
The reason people are/were against frivolous lawsuits are because juries would award people lots of money for stupid stuff lol, not because they fail. And its hard to overturn a jury's verdict, so counting failed appeals as 'support' isnt saying anything.
Your confusing this case with an "actual" frivolous suit. I'm wondering if you actually read the whole article. This was not someone spilling coffee on themselves at a McDonalds.
The fact that you site the McDonalds case as frivolous just sort of proves the subjectivity of how its applied
Could you please explain to those of us who are way more ignorant than you how a law suit can be frivolous when the plaintiff has been awarded $36 million, and the defendant has exhausted its appeals? I will hang up and listen.
Someone already cited the McDonalds case, perhaps the most famous of the "frivolous" lawsuits when tort reform was a passion. The reason it entered the lexicon is that people were winning them and costing businesses big money because juries would award large judgements. And people who support businesses didn't like being sued for millions.
Wonder what's going on. In Florida, at least, a party typically has to post an appellate bond in order to stay a money judgment. Maybe this school just isn't collectible? Not clear to me.
That's just ugly and bizarre, unless you've got solid info that the story simply isn't true. But ... and note the partisanship of the judges. Not quite as blind as we might like ... Ohio Supreme Court rejects Oberlin College’s appeal of $36 million defamation verdict
I am not following you. The lawsuit obviously was not frivolous. As to the McDonald’s case, although it seems that the plaintiff was also negligent in putting a cup of coffee between her legs, the coffee was way too hot and severely injured her. I seem to recall that she came close to dying. Are you being tongue in cheek about the Gibson’s lawsuit being frivolous?
Does winning mean it isnt frivolous? I dont get what you are trying to say, because "frivolous lawsuits" entered the lexicon because people were deemed to be winning 'frivolous' lawsuits and getting money from rich businesses or institutions over petty matters.
