But at the moment it’s not an action, it’s a judgment. That’s a debt owing. I wouldn’t have thought a judgment for a fixed amount would abate because the plaintiff dies. I would think that only happens if the plaintiff dies and the defendant is successful on appeal, but I don’t know anything about Ohio law.
Only if they also win the appeal, I think, but I don’t know Ohio law.
As an aside: The Anglican Church here (nsw.aus) had to pay out their trust fund in one case I know of here. The trustees objected, as I think they were legally bound to do, and it went to court, and the court said (as higher courts can) that the terms of the trust were set aside and the trust funds had to go to somebody else.
I may well be wrong (or maybe I misunderstood the question). The judgment itself is subject to interest. And I read that cite as saying that the bond was set an amount that is supposed to provide for the fact that, while the case is on appeal, the total amount owed will increase.
But I understood the question as being whether the bond itself would somehow be subject to interest (I guess like using a loan or something). I guess my point is that the total amount owed should not change as a result of the appeal bond (but will change, due to interest, because of the delayed payment).
Good point. I don’t know. I know that a criminal proceeding is generally void ab initio if the defendant dies while the case is on direct appeal (and I think that’s what I was thinking of). I don’t know what happens in a civil case.
So (replying to posts above): If the two men die, Oberlin is off the hook for several million, but still has to pay the other penalties, right? So by waiting out the deaths, they can reduce their financial burden, but not escape it entirely?
“How many cats do you own?” should be a standard interview question for all institutions of learning.
The “I need some muscle over here lady” from Missouri? I’ve got the over on six.
Somewhat related, Vlogger Benjamin Boyce has started to put up a series of videos covering the events at Evergreen college a few years ago, many parallels between them, and a look at how cultish the environment can become.
Did the jury not put in a deadline of sorts, and that is why Oberlin can try to wait out David’s death?
Generally, there are three types of losing defendants:
-
Those who are genuinely sorry,
-
Those who are only sorry that they got caught,
-
Those who aren’t even sorry at all.
Oberlin seems to be placing itself squarely in Category 3#.
Now that the August 19 deadline for filing post-trial motions or an appeal has come and gone, does anyone know how or if Oberlin has responded?
Trial court just gave its decision on the two post - trial motions, denying Oberlin’s application for judgment notwithstanding verdict and motion for a new trial.
Also denied plaintiffs’ application for prejudgment interest.
Looks like appeal prioceedings don’t start until after those applications were decided.
I was curious to see if there had been any further developments in this case, so went poking around. Looks like Oberlin College has filed an appeal, based on the Ohio state constitutional rights to freedom of expression. The Gibsons have filed a cross-appeal, challenging the cap on damages under Ohio law: Gibson’s Bakery Files Cross-Appeal.
And, David Gibson died of pancreatic cancer in the fall. He’s survived by his father, Alyn Sr, and his son, Alyn Jr.: David Gibson of Gibson’s Bakery dies; funeral arrangements set. Haven’t seen any discussion whether that will affect the appeal, as we speculated up-thread.
And, earlier this month, the judge denied a motion by a news outlet for access to Facebook posts made by Alyn Gibson Jr., who was the clerk on duty the night of the incident and who chased the students when they left the store. He was not called as a witness and is not a party to the case, and his posts were not entered into evidence, so the judge ruled that his Facebook posts aren’t disclosable: Judge denies media request to make Allyn Gibson Facebook posts public
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.
Court rejects Oberlin College, Gibson’s Bakery appeals
The Ninth District Court of Appeals in Akron has upheld all of Lorain County Common Pleas Judge John Miraldi’s rulings in the long-running civil case of Gibson’s Bakery versus Oberlin College.
Oberlin still has the option to appeal to SCOTUS obviously, but I personally give that a slim chance of being approved for review.
I think an appeal lies from the Court of Appeals to the Ohio Supreme Court, but it’s by leave only.
I believe that the Federal courts are a separate path from states court in the org chart.
Introduction To The Federal Court System
District Courts
Circuit Courts
Supreme Court of the United States
But I’m prepared to be wrong considering that legal isn’t where my education lies. Or that I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
The Ninth District Court of Appeals is an intermediate state appellate court.
Ignorance fought, thanks. So there may be a few more episodes of this show than I was expecting.
Yes, this action is in the state courts, not the federal courts. Assuming it goes on appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, I’m not aware of any aspect of the legal issues that would allow a subsequent application for cert, to the US Supreme Court.
From what I’ve seen, it’s all a question of liability under state law, with no issue of federal law or US Constitutional law, so nothing to invoke the jurisdiction of the IS Supreme Court. (but I’ve not been following it real closely, so I may be wrong on the legal issues).
If you were a local, like I am, it would be much clearer that administrators from Oberlin College tried to influence/support the protesters and rapidly had to backtrack. This was intensely covered by local news.