I just looked at it again and it's as clear as mud without delving into Ohio law. The only issue on punitive damages is whether there capped at two times compensatory as limited by another statute. Oberlin appealed and said that they should have been limited to two times the maximum amount of compensatory damages allowed, not the maximum amount that the jury awarded that were not allowed. The appellate court disagreed. So it looks like there's about $12 million in actual damages and $24 million in punitive damages, using very rough figures. I don't even remember what formula the US Supreme Court is come up with under substantive due process, presuming that is still a thing, about limiting punitive damages against businesses. Again, the whole thing seem to be pretty thin gruel to even justify compensatories against the University, much less punitive.
Putting aside the merits of the case, I found this quote from her interesting: "If I got the money from the college, I wouldn’t buy a house, or go on vacation, or leave Ohio. I would replace the compressors for the refrigerators and replace the fryers and proofers that we use for our dough. I would pay off the mortgages on my properties that I’ve taken out in the past few years. I’d hire back employees and ramp up production." Maybe plaintiffs are expected to say stuff like this, but if you get millions of dollars, you're not even going to take a vacation? I get addressing debt (though debt can often make financial sense), but to ramp up production when she says there's no foot traffic and sales are way down? I suppose they're perhaps looking at selling to more outsiders or that stories like this will help them bring in more business. But give me millions, and I'm retiring. She could even leave the business to family members. I guess some people are just workaholics.
Now I understand why the IRS is hiring 76,000 agents. It’s to make sure that the plaintiff pays taxes on the $36 million. One other point. It looks like Oberlin hired James Taylor as it’s appellate lawyer. You should never hire a folk singer to be your appellate lawyer.
Awesome on JT - I saw that. He's the best. As Sting said, JT looks a bit like Lincoln, so he evokes a frontier lawyer
Just let it go, you and I disagree about political stuff and occasional on basketball stuff. I still think you’re one of the most knowledgeable posters, at least about basketball, lol, on this site. He’s hard to follow sometimes.
What's the defamation, though? Keep in mind that defamation cases should be hard to win because of the First Amendment rights intertwined in it. This all seems very suspect to me. And the OP's article only makes it seem more suspect because of how disingenuous the framing is.
Speaking of JT, I did not think I could hate Alito any more than I already did and then I read this in a long form New Yorker piece. During the Warren Court era, Alito said, “the legal vanguard” had imagined that “the law would move dramatically” leftward—“but they turned out to be wrong.” To laughter, he added, “To coin another phrase, ‘Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.’ ” Alito was quoting the James Taylor song “Fire and Rain.” Those lyrics, of course, aren’t about the crushing of progressive dreams—they’re about Taylor’s addiction struggles and a friend’s suicide. But you wouldn’t expect a Guy Lombardo fan to know that. Fire and Rain is sacred to me. That is such a profound lament about the expected loss of a close friend. How soulless that he mocks and desecrates such painful beauty.
Still in pain thinking about him mocking that. What a horrible individual. Trying not to descend into his darkness.
I think they closed the Elyria branch several decades ago, when the current owner/operator moved back to Oberlin. Only someone who has never owned a business would think closing a remote branch = failing.
I don't know Ohio law, plainly, but knowing the Florida law for proving lost profits, it is amazing they were able to prove $12 billion in compensatory loss profits do solely to the so-called defamation. It's not even clear that part of their damages or the loss of the University contracts come up which we're replaced and offered to be renewed earlier. It is hard for me to imagine that's the case. Obviously I don't know the evidence, not that that limitation has limited other posters from giving authoritative opinions on what they know happened. But that really strikes me as hard to understand.
There are some posters in this thread showing that they are all about “their” team right or wrong. Doesn’t matter the truth, the circumstances, or the evidence. Some people are just all in for their side of the aisle. This lawsuit is settled. The big powerful liberal school lost to the mom and pop business. The FACTS of the events have been heard over and over. Evidence has been presented. There is really no more arguments to be made. Overlain has been found guilty. This is woke culture run amok and being reigned in.
Listening to this podcast now on how Republican treasurers are organizing boycotts of financial service companies that are choosing to take climate change seriously in their investment decisions. We all know what would happen if that was considered somehow actionable What Next: The Red States Punishing Green Businesses - Slate Daily Feed
