(06-09-2019 07:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  #stopfrivolouslawsuits?

Actions have consequences.

(06-10-2019 06:15 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-09-2019 07:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  #stopfrivolouslawsuits?

Actions have consequences.

I don’t disagree... which is exactly why I do not support attempts to cap medical malpractice liability or to railroad employees into arbitration hearings instead of allowing them to utilize the court system.

(06-11-2019 08:22 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(06-10-2019 06:15 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-09-2019 07:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  #stopfrivolouslawsuits?

Actions have consequences.

I don’t disagree... which is exactly why I do not support attempts to cap medical malpractice liability or to railroad employees into arbitration hearings instead of allowing them to utilize the court system.

I can get on board with doing away with arbitration hearings given as how the entity usually hires the arbitrator and that automatically stacks the odds in the entity's favor. At least that's how I understand that process.

(06-11-2019 08:28 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 08:22 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(06-10-2019 06:15 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-09-2019 07:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  #stopfrivolouslawsuits?

Actions have consequences.

I don’t disagree... which is exactly why I do not support attempts to cap medical malpractice liability or to railroad employees into arbitration hearings instead of allowing them to utilize the court system.

I can get on board with doing away with arbitration hearings given as how the entity usually hires the arbitrator and that automatically stacks the odds in the entity's favor. At least that's how I understand that process.

Those arbitration hearings help clear court dockets that are out of control. Moreover, it helps keep expenses/costs down for both sides and brings these matter to resolution quicker (as opposed to waiting for years to get a trial date).

As for medical malpractice reform, there are a couple states with a "hard cap" (meaning cap on total damages) but most states only have caps on non-economic damages (meaning pain and suffering). There are still 8 states with no caps, nearly all which are considered to be "judicial hell holes".

(06-11-2019 09:23 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 08:28 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 08:22 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(06-10-2019 06:15 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-09-2019 07:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  #stopfrivolouslawsuits?

Actions have consequences.

I don’t disagree... which is exactly why I do not support attempts to cap medical malpractice liability or to railroad employees into arbitration hearings instead of allowing them to utilize the court system.

I can get on board with doing away with arbitration hearings given as how the entity usually hires the arbitrator and that automatically stacks the odds in the entity's favor. At least that's how I understand that process.

Those arbitration hearings help clear court dockets that are out of control. Moreover, it helps keep expenses/costs down for both sides and brings these matter to resolution quicker (as opposed to waiting for years to get a trial date).

As for medical malpractice reform, there are a couple states with a "hard cap" (meaning cap on total damages) but most states only have caps on non-economic damages (meaning pain and suffering). There are still 8 states with no caps, nearly all which are considered to be "judicial hell holes".

I get all that but also realize that process is inherently unfair to those suing, etc. It is what it is. An entity isn't going to continue to use an arbitrator that rules against them.

(06-11-2019 09:32 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 09:23 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 08:28 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-11-2019 08:22 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(06-10-2019 06:15 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Actions have consequences.

I don’t disagree... which is exactly why I do not support attempts to cap medical malpractice liability or to railroad employees into arbitration hearings instead of allowing them to utilize the court system.

I can get on board with doing away with arbitration hearings given as how the entity usually hires the arbitrator and that automatically stacks the odds in the entity's favor. At least that's how I understand that process.

Those arbitration hearings help clear court dockets that are out of control. Moreover, it helps keep expenses/costs down for both sides and brings these matter to resolution quicker (as opposed to waiting for years to get a trial date).

As for medical malpractice reform, there are a couple states with a "hard cap" (meaning cap on total damages) but most states only have caps on non-economic damages (meaning pain and suffering). There are still 8 states with no caps, nearly all which are considered to be "judicial hell holes".

I get all that but also realize that process is inherently unfair to those suing, etc. It is what it is. An entity isn't going to continue to use an arbitrator that rules against them.

Honestly, I think the plaintiff ends up doing pretty well. There are several variables to consider:

1. Guarantee of outcome. I don't care how good your case is, there is always a risk of getting a zero. If not zero, more often than not you get less than you ask for.
2. Money in your pocket much sooner. It takes several years to get a case to trial. If you can get the money in hand in 12-18 months, its worth it in most cases to put closure to all this.
3. Sliding fee scales and expenses. Even if you get more money at trial, the award is often eaten by additional expenses for deposition costs and expert witness fees, (trust me, this is very expensive). The plaintiff attorney's contingency fee goes up if a case goes to trial (often they take 1/3 prior to trial, 40-45% if the case goes to trial). If the case is settled early on, you may be able to negotiate the fee to even less.

The plaintiff typically always wins at arbitration. Most arbitrations go like this: the plaintiff has a demand and the defense has their number. Most of the arbitrators are "consensus-builders" so they'll just split that number right down the middle. For this reason, I haven't agreed to arbitration in years. I like my chances better with a jury who despite the public misconception, are much more reasonable than lawyers and judges who make the call in an arbitration (there are actually studies out there to support my inclination).

Arbitration is in place to minimize exposure for the company. It’s not in place to help the employee.

(06-10-2019 02:02 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Oberlin College has been radical since they opened their doors in the 1830's. The Dean of Students not only let this go on, he was out in front of the bakery handing out leaflets during the protests in front of the bakery.

One caviat to all of this is that the university's insurer, Lexington Insurance, has raised the defense these acts are not covered by the policy (Intentional Acts Exclusion). Moreover, punitive damages are not insurable in the state of Ohio. There's a good chance the university will have to pay some* if not all of this judgment out of their own coffers.

* Odds are there will be some post-trial settlement negotiations between plaintiff, Oberlin and their insurance carrier.

Start with the President and Dean's of the college forfeiting parts of their salaries to pay the debt. That would send a message that intolerant actions has consequences.

(06-11-2019 11:29 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Arbitration is in place to minimize exposure for the company. It’s not in place to help the employee.

I don't usually agree with you but that is spot on.

They needed to be sued back to the stone age long ago, thankfully it happened finally.

And fun fact, Oberlin was the last college football team from Ohio to beat OSU. Some time in the twenties I believe.

(06-11-2019 11:29 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Arbitration is in place to minimize exposure for the company. It’s not in place to help the employee.

True.

(06-11-2019 09:13 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  They needed to be sued back to the stone age long ago, thankfully it happened finally.

True.

Quote:fun fact, Oberlin was the last college football team from Ohio to beat OSU. Some time in the twenties I believe.

And true again. Oberlin 7, Ohio State 6. Game played 08th October 1921 in Columbus.

(06-11-2019 11:29 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Arbitration is in place to minimize exposure for the company. It’s not in place to help the employee.

I agree. The same with HR.

How in the world can a business be labeled RACIST for CATCHING SHOPLIFTERS???

@ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.


https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

After their smug, arrogant, condescending post-verdict comments, I would have been shocked by a different result.

Now comes the appeal phase and likely settlement negotiations.

(06-13-2019 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

After their smug, arrogant, condescending post-verdict comments, I would have been shocked by a different result.

Now comes the appeal phase and likely settlement negotiations.

So, do you think we'll get the "reduced penalty with no admission of guilt" type conclusion to this?

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.


https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

A few things:

1) Plaintiff will move for prejudgment interest, currently 5% of the verdict per annum, going back to the date of the filing of the lawsuit. That's a few more million on top.
2) Attorney's fees were awarded as well on top of the punitive damages. Plaintiff counsel will likely generate a bill for the court to review that will at the minimum be a couple hundred grand, if not more.
3) The jury actually awarded $33M in punitive damages. There is a cap of twice the compensatory award (reducing it to $22M). Plaintiff counsel most likely pled that the caps were unconstitutional.

As Owl noted, post trial motions and pleadings will be filed. Negotiations will commence, however there is still the unresolved issue of the Dec Action filed by Lexington Insurance regarding coverage of the Intentional Acts.

(06-13-2019 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

After their smug, arrogant, condescending post-verdict comments, I would have been shocked by a different result.

Now comes the appeal phase and likely settlement negotiations.

Oberlin's insurance carrier is likely in charge now.

(06-13-2019 03:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

After their smug, arrogant, condescending post-verdict comments, I would have been shocked by a different result.

Now comes the appeal phase and likely settlement negotiations.

Oberlin's insurance carrier is likely in charge now.

No coverage for the punitive damages, and they have filed a Dec Action arguing no coverage for any compensatory damages awarded for Intentional Acts. Oberlin will need personal counsel separate from counsel retained by the insurance carrier to navigate through all this and negotiate anything not covered by insurance.

(06-13-2019 03:38 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:10 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 03:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  @ellencarmichael
BREAKING: Jury awards Gibson's Bakery & owners maximum punitive damages, bringing total judgment against Oberlin College to $33 million. This historic case proves colleges can be held accountable for defamation of private individuals & businesses.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/ob...kery-case/

After their smug, arrogant, condescending post-verdict comments, I would have been shocked by a different result.
Now comes the appeal phase and likely settlement negotiations.

Oberlin's insurance carrier is likely in charge now.

No coverage for the punitive damages, and they have filed a Dec Action arguing no coverage for any compensatory damages awarded for Intentional Acts. Oberlin will need personal counsel separate from counsel retained by the insurance carrier to navigate through all this and negotiate anything not covered by insurance.

I only hope that Oberlin gets screwed badly enough to make a serious impression on other university administrations.