Loading...
Title :
link :
Oberlin College is determined to avoid paying the judgment in favor of Gibson’s Bakery
Risking an extra liability in interest of 4 million. They're so full of it that they think SCOTUS will be on their side. Fat chance. SCOTUS would be unlikely even to take the case
With interest running at over $4k per day, Oberlin College seeks stay of execution of Gibson’s Bakery $32 million judgment, but doesn’t want to post a bond.
The $25 million damages judgment plus the over $6.5 million attorney’s fees and expenses award, puts Oberlin College almost $32 million in debt to Gibson’s Bakery and its owners.
Post-judgment interest in Ohio is 5%, which if my math is correct, on $32 million equals $1.6 million a year just in interest, or $4,384 per day. So that $32 million is going to keep growing as the inevitable appeal winds its way through the courts.
Interest aside, Oberlin College doesn’t want Gibson’s Bakery to start collecting the judgment by seizing bank accounts, college equipment, and anything else they can get their hands on.
Not surprisingly, Oberlin College has filed a Motion for a Stay of Execution of Judgment. The motion also requests that Oberlin College not be required to post a bond to secure the judgment while the trial court rules on post-trial motions Oberlin College says it will be filing.
Here is Oberlin College’s key argument:
"Defendants intend to file motions under Civ.R. 50, 59, and/or 60. And per the express provisions of Civ.R. 62(A), a stay of execution may be issued at any time after a judgment is issued and before the time for filing motions pursuant to Civ.R. 50, 59, and 60 and while such motions are pending.
Defendants further respectfully request that they not be required to post a bond in the amount of the Judgment at this time. In the event that Defendants’ post-trial motions are not successful and require Defendants to appeal, Defendants will then file a supersedeas bond as required by Civ.R. 62(B) at the time Defendants file their notice of appeal. This supersedeas bond, if necessary, will be in the amount of the Judgment, plus any additional amount that may potentially be awarded by the Court in attorneys’ fees."
Gibson’s Bakery has filed an Opposition to the Motion which opposes the stay and also argued that if a stay of execution is granted, that a bond be required.
After noting that post-judgment interest at 5% is pretty much automatic, Gibson’s Bakery pointed out the math: The judgment interest rate in 2019 is 5%. Therefore, if appeals of this case last just three years, the total amount of post-judgment interest that Defendants will have to pay is $4,742,179.77 –which is $1,580,726.59 per year or $4,330.76 per day. Three years appears likely for the appeals process, according to Gibson’s Bakery:
Since the jury’s verdict, Oberlin College has given every indication that they are digging in for a long battle. For instance, Oberlin College President Carmen Twillie Ambar has broadcasted plans for an upcoming “lengthy and complex legal process” in her public statements…
Defendants have already expressed that they will not accept the verdict of the Lorain County jury. They have also suggested that they will not accept any adverse decision by the Ninth District Court of Appeals and, instead, will ultimately proceed to the Ohio Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of Ohio’s 2018 Statistical Summary shows that the time from filing a jurisdictional appeal to the Supreme Court until a full merit review by that Court averages 496 days.5 As such, a three-year period of appeals (through the Ninth District and Ohio Supreme Court) is a conservative timeframe for purposes of setting the appropriate post-judgment interest amount to be included in the bond requirement.
Perhaps expecting that a stay will be granted, Gibson’s Bakery devotes much of its opposition to arguing for a bond:
"A stay of judgment execution is not automatic under Ohio law for private litigants. Defendants do not have some absolute right to a stay of execution. Should the Court decide, in its discretion under Civ. R. 62(A), that Defendants are entitled to bond off the execution of the judgment, then Plaintiffs request that the bond be set at $36,356,711.56…."
The need for such bond is made clear by the College’s own statements about its dire fmancial straits. If the College is to be believed, there is serious concern about its ability to pay this sizeable judgment three years from now. At trial, and in its recent filing, the College represented that there was only $59.1 million of unrestricted endowment funds available to pay any dollar judgment and that $10 million of those funds had already been committed to pay down the College’s existing debt. [Trial Tr., June 12, 2019 at 95:13-21] There remains $190 million of existing debt on the College’s books. [Id.] The College has also testified that it has a significant operating deficit and that its deficit situation is not sustainable…. [Trial Tr., June 12, 2019 atpp. 86:1-6, 88:1-9]
The College also testified at trial that they have experienced a “significant” and “steady” decline of enrollment from 2014 to 2018. [Trial Tr., June 12, 2019 at 79:4-17] In describing their economic position, the College offered Exhibit N-33 at trial, which is its May 10, 2019 report entitled “One Oberlin: The Academic & Administrative Program Review Final Report.” [Trial Tr., June 12, 2019 at pp. 99-100] In that Report, the College describes its alleged financial hardships and warns about how many other private colleges have had to close due to financial difficulties …[Ex. N-33, pp. 4-5].
Thus, we know that Oberlin College could attempt to continue using its available funds to pay down its other debts between now and the filing of a notice of appeal, thereby leaving less available to pay the judgment in this case.
Will Oberlin College be able to secure a bond? Probably, but it might not be as easy as you would think. At a minimum Oberlin College would have to pledge substantial liquid collateral, perhaps even 100% of the total judgments plus enough to cover interest. The insurance companies writing these appeal bonds want to take zero risk. It’s possible that Oberlin College could get another financial institution to guarantee payment to the insurance company, but Oberlin College’s credit rating already is under pressure.
SOURCE
Elizabeth Warren proposes student debt cancellation, free tuition plan
First unveiled in April, the Student Loan Debt Relief Act (which Warren introduced alongside Rep. James Clayburn, D-S.C.) would cancel up to $50,000 in student loan debt for every household with a gross income less than $100,000, roughly 42 million Americans, or about three out of four borrowers.
Outstanding student loan debt has doubled over the past decade, nearing a staggering $1.6 trillion in June. It’s the largest amount of non-mortgage debt in the U.S. and has been cited as a major hindrance in people’s “economic life” by Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. In fact, according to a study from the NeighborWorks America at Home, 59 percent of millennials knew someone who delayed buying a home because of student loan debt.
“Enough is enough,” the Massachusetts senator said. “I have a plan to cancel student debt for millions of Americans and finally end this crisis.”
Private student loan borrowers would also be eligible for debt forgiveness under her plan by converting their private debt into federal student loans. It would also suspend the collection of student loan payments for a year while the Department of Education carries out the loan forgiveness plans.
Warren’s plan comes on the heels of a similar -- but perhaps more far-reaching -- plan proposed by 2020 rival Sen. Bernie Sanders, who, at the end of June, rolled out, alongside Reps. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., legislation that would cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt in the U.S.
Conversely, Warren’s plan would cancel debt entirely for about 75 percent of borrowers, and offer relief to 95 percent.
As previously reported, Warren's campaign estimated the plan would cost about $640 billion. However, she said that would be paid for the "ultra-millionaire tax" -- anyone with more than $50 million in assets would pay a 2 percent tax. For those who have assets valued at $1 billion or higher, it would be a 3 percent tax. It’s projected to generate about $2.75 billion in revenue over the next decade, according to Warren.
SOURCE
From protests to trigger warnings: the creeping threats to free speech at Australian universities
Leading American intellectual Jonathan Haidt says academic freedom at Australian universities is in a healthier state than in the United States but there are danger signs that warrant nationwide action.
Professor Haidt, a social psychologist based at New York University, has held meetings with Education Minister Dan Tehan and academics during a visit to Australia and found indications that free expression is in retreat on campuses, consistent with a global decline in the state of debate.
American intellectual Jonathan Haidt says Australian universities need to act to protect freedoms on campus.
American intellectual Jonathan Haidt says Australian universities need to act to protect freedoms on campus.CREDIT:ANDREW KELLY
American universities have been convulsed by arguments about free expression, with controversies surrounding the free speech of speakers on campus and the ability of academics and students to explore sensitive topics.
Professor Haidt, author of The Coddling of the American Mind, said his experiences in Australia led him to conclude "things are not as bad here but it's starting, so it's vital that your professors and administrators respond consistently to them" by putting safeguards in place.
There were some cases of politically "radical" students shutting down academics and pressure from other lecturers and university administrators.
"If everyone buckles and changes their language, then you will have what we have," he said.
He said protests against controversial speakers, including author Bettina Arndt, pointed to a problem.
"Everyone agrees that students have a right to protest but there is a clear, sharp line. The point at which any student interferes with the ability of another student to listen to another talk is a violation of core academic values," he said.
The violation should be treated as equal to plagiarism and punished accordingly, according to Professor Haidt.
He said rules and norms needed to be enshrined to protect pursuit of truth as a university's ultimate goal that must not be restricted.
Australia's universities are considering a model code to protect free speech and inquiry, proposed by High Court chief justice Robert French in a review commissioned by the Coalition government.
Professor Haidt backed the idea of a code but said the French model, while reasonable, contained "very large loopholes" that could still be deployed against controversial content. This included wording on a university's "duty to foster the wellbeing of staff and students".
Mr Tehan said his meeting with Professor Haidt was "thought-provoking" and the pair agreed it was important to promote a diversity of opinions in academia.
"One message I took away, is that Australia should look at what has happened at universities in the US and the UK and act now to prevent it happening here," Mr Tehan said.
As Australian institutions examine the strengthened protections, Professor Haidt said it was important for academic leaders to be "much more vocal from the moment students arrive on campus through to graduation, they must enforce those norms and punish people who violate those norms in a serious way".
He questioned the growing popularity of trigger warnings and safe spaces in academic environments.
He said there was no evidence that trigger warnings helped students with difficult content and a handful of studies suggested they had no positive effect.
"The way to get over a fear or phobia or PTSD is through repeated exposure to a stimulus in a physically safe environment and that's exactly what a classroom is," he said. "So I think there is no space on a university campus for content warnings."
He also said no classroom should ever be treated as a "safe space" because of the risk it would shut down candid discussion.
SOURCE
thus Article
that is all articles
This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article with the link address https://onechildsmart.blogspot.com/2019/07/oberlin-college-is-determined-to-avoid.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment