Introduction
It all began in the racially charged aftermath of the
2016 general election when a group of three African American teenage students
from Oberlin college, one male and two females, walked into the Gibson bakery
with the intent of illegally obtaining wine either through theft or use of a
fake Id. The store owner David and his son Allyn Gibson realized what was
happening and attempted to detain the students. A fight ensued, leading to the
arrest of the three students. During the arrest, the students insisted the
incident was racially motivated. Word traveled quickly back to the Oberlin college
campus. The next day students organized a protest in front of Gibson Bakery.
Oberlin college dismissed class to allow students to attend the protest.
Protesters called for a boycott of the bakery asserting the bakery had a long
history of racism. They held signs labeling the Gibson’s as racists and white
supremacists and passed out flyers printed at the university on university
stationery with the same message. The day happened to be cold, so the Oberlin administration
purchased gloves and ordered pizza for the protestors. The student senate
released a written resolution stating, “Gibson’s has a history of racial
profiling and discriminatory treatment of students and residents alike,” which
was posted on campus for one year. (3)
Plea bargain.
The
defendants were charged as follows, Jonathan Aladin, was initially charged with
robbery, a second-degree felony. Cecelia Whettson and Endia j. Lawrence were charged
with first-degree misdemeanor assault. Jonathan’s attorney filed a motion to
dismiss the felony charge with a proposed plea to a new 2nd-degree misdemeanor
charge of attempted theft, With the recommendation Jonathan be placed on a
diversion program and upon successful completion of diversion the case be
dismissed. (3) Even though all the parties agreed with the plea deal, the judge
threw the plea deal out on account that it would be damaging to Gibson Bakery.
(3) The plea was reworked to as to Keep 2nd degree attempted theft and added
aggravated trespass, and: Underage purchase and consumption. (4) Jonathan and
Endia took the guilty plea. (4,5) Cecelia’s record is sealed. The guilty plea
also included a recant of the acquisition of racism.
Involvement of Oberlin university
Oberlin college, a private Liberal arts college that has
a population of 3000 students and Faculty located 15 miles off the shores of
Lake Erie. (1) During the protest, Oberlin college facilitated the protest by
providing logistical support for the students. Oberlin college suspended
classes and encouraged students to attend the protest. Oberlin college offered
free food and drinks to the protesting students. Faculty of Oberlin college
participated in the protest at a personal capacity except for a faculty member Meredith
Raimondo, who was required to be at student activities per the student handbook
but didn’t participate in the protest. Oberlin College also instituted an
economic boycott of Gibson bakery but later reinstated the business. (3)
Impact on Gibson bakery.
Gibson
Bakery was starting to feel the effects of the protest. Gibson bakery lost a
100-year business relationship with Oberlin college; it lost traffic through
its store and consequently lost revenue. The Gibson’s family reputation was now
tarnished (2), And the Gibson’s Bakery employees reported harassment by the
general public.
Gibson Bakery felt like they had no option left but to file a lawsuit against Oberlin College. The Gibson’s felt in a small city like Oberlin. Having the largest business and employer against you is more than enough to seal your fate. (2) Gibson listed eight complaints against Oberlin college, Libel, Slander, Tortious interference with business relationships, Tortious interference with contracts, Deceptive Trade practices, Intention Infliction of emotional distress, Negligent hiring, retention & supervision and Trespass.
Motion
for Summary judgment
After discovery, Oberlin college filed a motion for
summary judgment seeking a judgment in their favor on all the claims. The judge
dismissed Oberlin’s college motion for summary judgment for five of the counts
which included Libel, Tortious interference with business relationship,
Tortious interface with contracts, Intentional Infliction of emotional
distress, and Trespass. The judge granted summary judgment in the defends favor
for three counts, Slander, Deceptive trade practices and Negligent hiring,
retention, supervision (4)
Trial and Jury award.
The case went to trial and was ultimately decided by a
jury. The jury found Oberlin college acted with both Libel and Malice,
interfered with a 100-year business relationship, failed to act as the adult in
the room, enable a culture of shoplifting, and engaged in bullying tactics or
attempted to stifle opinions of critics. (7) As a result, the jury award the
Gibson’s Bakery $44 million verdict which included $33.2 million in punitive
damages. (1) This award was reduced by the presiding judge to $25 million. (8)
The judge ruled David Gibson should receive $14.5 million, Allyn should receive
$6.5 million, and the bakery should receive $4.5 million.
Questions
1.
Do you think
the judge got the summary judgment right? What would you do differently?
2.
Considering
our most recent readings on plea bargains, do you think by taking the plea deal
the defendants agreed the action taken against them by the Gibson’s and the Police
was appropriate?
3.
Who should be
liable when students of a higher learning institution engage in speech that may
be considered Libel? Should the Gibson’s sue the students or school?
What does the verdict mean for the future of free speech in higher learning
institutions?
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oberlin-college-president-defamation-lawsuit-verdict-gibsons-bakery-44-million-libel/https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2019/06/21/oberlin-college-gibson-bakery-lawsuit-column/1523525001/
- http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/06/09/gibson.bakery.v.oberlin.college.lawsuit.pdf
- https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College-Decision-Denying-Summary-Judgment.pdf
- http://cp.onlinedockets.com/loraincp/case_dockets/Docket.aspx?CaseID=375061
- http://cp.onlinedockets.com/loraincp/case_dockets/Docket.aspx?CaseID=375066
- https://www.lawlion.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UPDATED-FAQs-re-Gibsons-Bakery-v.-Oberlin-College.pdf
- https://apnews.com/f4bfb5db0289435ba34f636f74566524
Excellent post Lenny! It would be interesting to see if other incidents have ever happened at the bakery or if any allegations about the bakery family are in anyway substantiated. I think it is the Universities duty to be neutral in these types of community issues. The students have to obey a honor code, so I think the University should stay dormant in certain community problems involving issues that may concern students and law enforcement. This could have been a teaching moment to the students by the University instead of encouraging behavior that has created a financial hardship on the community bakery. The code of conduct for the students at Oberlin specifically prohibits use of alcohol for underage students and further states it will not protect against unlawful acts. See the below excerpts from the Code of Conduct page at the University.
ReplyDelete"While the college’s emphasis is on preventative and educational approaches to substance use and abuse, the college will not protect students from local, state, or federal laws. College conduct procedures will be initiated if a complaint of misconduct related to drug, alcohol, or tobacco use is filed by a member of the Oberlin College community. Conduct sanctions may include suspension or dismissal, depending on the seriousness of the offense." (1)
"Oberlin College conduct system seeks to create an environment that educates students about the relationship between their personal freedom and their responsibilities to their community, that promotes the orderly functioning of the community, that holds all members of the community accountable for their behavior, and that promotes habits of effective and engaged citizenship." (2)
It would appear the University violated it's own code a conduct it mandates the students to adhere too. The University should have been more neutral until more details emerged opposed to encouraging and facilitating unruly behavior. I do agree with the summary judgment by the judge. I do not think there was a plea deal because a jury decided the case (Correct?). I think students freedom of speech should be preserved at all cost; however, if the university chooses to have a stance the audience is exponentially increased creating a larger issue and potential liabilities. In my opinion, the University on some levels condoned the behavior of the teenagers and publicly executed the bakery before the details could be gathered.
(1) https://www.oberlin.edu/sites/default/files/content/2019-2020_alcohol_tobacco_and_other_drugs_policy.pdf
(2) https://www.oberlin.edu/dean-of-students/student-conduct
Cain, the local police run some analysis on the number of people arrested for shoplifting at Gibson's bakery in the last 5 years. They found out of 40 adults arrested for shoplifting at Gibson's Bakery, only six (6) were African-American suspects. I also agree with you, the university should have adhered to their own honor code and been a neutral party.
DeleteSorry.. I misread the plea bargain question.. I do not believe they agreed but were simply mitigating the risk of a potentially harsher consequence and legal ramifications. I think the plea bargain was a decision to avoid public scrutiny with trial and limit they exposure to future consequences of harming their futures.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a big fan of plea deals. It seems the current thinking in the judicial system is to stack charges against defendants to get them to plea down to a lesser charge and spend the least amount of effort in prepping for a trial. I frankly believe these three teenagers may have tried to purchase the wine with a fake ID, and it just went wrong. But for the cops to charge them with aggravated robbery. I think that's a little too much.
DeleteI agree with you one hundred percent. Secondly, the theory of charging high to get a lessor charge can also backfire due to the guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Excellent post!!
DeleteThis was a great informative post. I think I heard about this case briefly but didn't hear the specifics and the how far it went.
ReplyDeleteFor your first question I think the judge was mostly right on the summary judgement on the grounds of deceptive trade practices, negligent trade practices and supervision. I think some of those charges were a bit of a stretch for this scenario. But i do think the Judge was wrong on the count of slander. I believe granting that judgement was a bit premature and should have been allowed to go to jury.
As for the plea bargains, I think that pleading was the appropriate step as it probably allowed them to get out of a more serious consequences. It was definitely a move to save themselves from harsher punishment. I thought the fact the judge dismissed the first deal as it was going to be damaging to the bakery was interesting. Making it so they had to recant their charged statement of racism. I wonder how often does that occur.
For your third question I think students should be held responsible for their own actions. In this particular case I agree with Gibsons suing the school as it was the enabler and ecouraged the protest and actions of their students which is going above and beyond their own mandates and essentially put themselves as the protester. I think if it was just general students doing it I can see it being more of a free speech and misinformed protest. But once the University went out of it's way to financially support the students it took an active role to keep the protest alive and to damage this bakery without knowing the full facts. This helped bring national attention to the bakery which i think is why the Gbsons won their lawsuit.
As for the future of free speech i think as i said before if this was group of students who did this on thier own it would have been one thing. I think you can say that might have been free speech. But once they were essentially sponsored by the University and this action was to bring about hamr it went above free speech. A business has a right to operate and the University used it's known heavy influence to damage the bakery without true cause as they didn't have the facts.
Ethan, I think the judge should have also granted summary judgment for intentionally inflicting emotional harm in favor of Oberlin. I do not deny there was emotional harm. However, that was a direct result of the student's actions. It had nothing to do with the college.I can imagine a situation where Ph.D. students write their thesis on a topic that upsets a bunch of people. Then they sue the school because the student utilized the school's resources to write his thesis. As for the other counts, I think he nailed them. Gibson's crossed the line when they pulled the contract from Oberlin.
DeleteI have really mixed feelings about this case. The kids were just trying to buy alcohol with a fake I.D. and this is why citizens should not try to be the police. If they just refused to sell to them I wonder how differently it would have gone. I would like to say it is based on race but Lenny already gave statistics that say otherwise. Even though I don't really agree with everything in this case the Judge probably did get the summary judgement right. I do agree with what was dismissed. I don't even know how they threw in the negligent hiring and retention and thought that would stick. I don't agree with the plea deal at all. They tried to charge them with a lot and generally when it is a first time offense it is not that extensive of a plea deal. I don't agree that in signing the plea deal a part of it was stating the actions of the police and Gibson's was appropriate. I have a little different take on the College being at fault and being sued. Part of it I understand per "under the law" and if they had any type of agreement due to business reasons with the college and had a relationship for years BUT I also went to private Liberal Arts College and part of it is standing behind students and they were supporting it under the pretense of race. There was a supported walk out during my time at my college as well as many political groups, walk outs, and protests. Just like the college and students have the right to support each other and protest a local business, a local business also has the right to sue for slander or libel if they truly feel their business was affected. I still am not sure how I feel about this case. It seems extreme with the punishments of the students but also a very extreme verdict of the payout to the Gibson's. It appears the Judge was making an example of the college and being in a small town.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe case of Oberlin College getting schooled by the legal system was a great reread. I had read about this incident after the verdict came out and the case results blatantly showed Oberlin failed to stay in the proverbial school crosswalk. The judge and jury vigorously came to the same conclusion that Oberlin crossed the line. I think before this case even happened; Oberlin College was deficient in how they handled the ongoing thefts by students at the town’s local stores. “The school's newspaper had previously published an article describing shoplifting as a rite of passage among Oberlin students. According to police records, between 2011 and 2016 there had been four robberies at Gibson's Bakery and 40 adults were arrested for shoplifting, of whom 33 were college students. According to Gibson's, the bakery loses "thousands" of dollars to shoplifters every year. The owner of a nearby Ben Franklin store reported losing more than $10,000 a year to shoplifters.” Long and short, I think the students were in the absolute wrong to rob the store and then beat up the owner. They were even more in the wrong to fraudulently decry their shoplifting choices and their consequences were racially motivated as they couched their false innocence on recent 2016 election. In my opinion, the students were overtly guilty of crying wolf and watering down legitimate racial discrimination to deflect ownership of their choices.
ReplyDeleteBased on the basic information I have on the case, I think the judge got it right on the summary judgment dismissal. However, depending on what college faculty said, to who, and when I think the charges on slander had the possibility of not being dismissed by summary judgment. The line between being a citizen and a representative of the school most likely blurred in this instance and it may have been difficult for the prosecution to prove the slander charges and as such they were dismissed.
To answer your other questions, I am not clear as to why the judge would consider the plea deal damaging to Gibson if all the parties agreed to it. Again, I would have to know more about this case. However, when the plea deal was reworked the students ended up not having any jail time. When their shoplifting turned into assault, they were lucky not to get a harsher punishment. When the police arrived, they witnessed Gibson lying on the ground with the three students punching and kicking him It does seem appropriate that there was a “recant of the acquisition of racism” as it was the accusation of racism that sparked the protests and school involvement moreso than the attempted robbery and assault. I would be curious to know what the “long history of racism” entailed. If the bakery had a 100 year relationship with Oberlin I would surmise that indeed there were some issues with race but I wonder if that was more a product of how society was in general across the United States as race issues and relations in the early 1900’s would of course be very different from what it is now. I think this was more an issue of the owner’s being fed up with being robbed and Oberlin students and the college were at fault for not addressing the ongoing issues of theft. I think the Gibson’s had the standing to sue Oberlin College, the student’s on the school senate and other students. The opportunity for free speech is still very much alive. But there is a professional line and Oberlin did cross it.
In this instance, I believe the college should be liable for the libel. Had the entire school not shut down and encouraged the students to attend the protest, it likely would not have been as large of a scene as it was. Not only did they shut down the school, but they provided food and clothing for the event. This directly involves them and makes it an organized function that the institute essentially hosted. Suing the school was the correct choice because of this. If the school had continued on as normal and only students chose to participate in the protest then it would have been appropriate to sue the students, however, I don’t believe there would have been as much damage done to Gibson’s if the school had not been so involved.
ReplyDeleteAs for the students taking a plea, I don’t believe they did so because they agree with the charges. I think pleas are most often taken because it is likely a lesser consequence than if they were to take their changes in trial.