Ohio Northern settles with former professor
The agreement, signed by Ohio Northern President Melissa Baumann and former law professor Scott Gerber on March 19, brings an end to years of litigation between the parties two weeks before the case was set to be heard by a jury in Hardin County.
Ohio Northern agreed to reinstate Gerber to his former position and faculty rank, in exchange for Gerber's agreement to retire immediately upon reinstatement, according to the settlement agreement filed in Hardin County Common Pleas Court.
Ohio Northern acknowledged through the agreement that Gerber "provided outstanding teaching, scholarship and service during his years on the Ohio Northern University faculty."
The university also acknowledged Gerber "at no time was ever a public safety risk to any member of the ONU community nor acted with moral turpitude," resolving a defamation claim Gerber raised in his lawsuit.
"Ohio Northern University is pleased to have reached a resolution to this personnel issue," university spokesman David Kielmeyer said in a statement Monday. "The compromise reached through this legal settlement brings this matter to a close."
Attorney Steve Forbes said, "Dr. Gerber is pleased that Ohio Northern recognized that he is an outstanding professor and that they rescinded his termination and reinstated him."
The settlement calls for Ohio Northern to dismiss with prejudice a lawsuit against Gerber in U.S. District Court, with court costs paid by the university.
In return, Gerber agreed to discontinue any complaints or lawsuits against Ohio Northern and cease publication of his planned memoir "Cancelled."
All parties agreed not to publicly discuss settlement terms beyond those listed in public court documents. The settlement bars all parties from disparaging one another in public or private as well.
Gerber filed his lawsuit in Hardin County Common Pleas Court to reverse his termination from the Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law, where worked as a tenured professor until the school fired him in 2023.
The lawsuit alleges Ohio Northern terminated Gerber in retaliation for his raising concerns about diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and what he believed to be illegal hiring practices favoring minorities and women at the law school.
Ohio Northern officials denied these allegations in court filings, which describe an alleged pattern of bullying, harassment and intimidation of colleagues preceding Gerber's termination.
The university filed its own lawsuit in U.S. District Court in January alleging Gerber was using litigation to seek political and personal revenge for past grievances.
Ohio Northern attorneys then sought to dismiss the Hardin County case weeks later, but Hardin County Common Pleas Court Judge Jonathan Hein denied the motion.
The settlement agreement averts a jury trial slated to begin April 7 in Hardin County.
Featured Local Savings
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
16 hours ago
- UPI
Trump's efforts to expel asylum seekers at the border blocked by judge
Asylum seekers stand in line for food, water, blankets and clothing near the border wall in Jacumba, California on Saturday, May 13, 2023. The migrant camp at the US-Mexican border is about 60 miles from San Diego. File photo by Ariana Dreshler/UPI | License Photo July 2 (UPI) -- A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the administration of President Donald Trump to stop implementing a proclamation to expel asylum seekers at the border that he had signed shortly after beginning his second term. Trump had signed the proclamation, titled "Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion," on January 20, his first day in office. It invoked emergency presidential powers to expel migrants before allowing them to apply for asylum. A coalition of immigrants and immigrant rights groups then sued the administration in February. U.S. District Court Judge Randolph Moss has now granted the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment, finding that Trump's proclamation and implementation guidance from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem violated the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. In his proclamation, Trump had said that the screenings of asylum seekers under the INA -- enacted by Congress -- can be "wholly ineffective" but that the law grants the president "certain emergency tools" if he were to find that the entry of any class of immigrants would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. "The court recognizes that the Executive Branch faces enormous challenges in preventing and deterring unlawful entry into the United States and in adjudicating the overwhelming backlog of asylum claims of those who have entered the country," Moss wrote. But he added that the Immigration and Nationality Act "provides the sole and exclusive means for removing people already present in the country." But Moss found that the INA "provides the sole and exclusive means for removing people already present in the country" and that the government lacked the statutory or constitutional authority to adopt an "alternative immigration system" to the one outlined by Congress. He stayed his ruling for 14 days in anticipation of a likely appeal from the Trump administration, and deferred judgment on whether the government should grant relief to plaintiffs who are no longer in the United States and other aspects of the judge's ruling also did not include an injunction at this stage and ordered the parties to submit a joint status report proposing a briefing schedule on unresolved issues. It comes after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week in the case of Trump v. CASA Inc., a landmark ruling that determined that lower courts generally lack authority to issue "nationwide" or "universal" injunctions unless they are essential to fully remedy the specific plaintiffs' harms. While an injunction has not yet been granted in this case, officials in the Trump administration have criticized Moss as a "rogue" judge seeking to "circumvent" the Supreme Court. "To try to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling on nationwide injunctions a Marxist judge has declared that all potential future illegal aliens on foreign soil (e.g. a large portion of planet Earth) are part of a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States," Stephen Miller posted on social media. Gene Hamilton, the former deputy White House counsel, called the judge's decision "judicial insurrection," while Attorney General Pamela Bondi said that the Justice Department would fight the "unconstitutional power grab.
The Hill
20 hours ago
- The Hill
Federal judge tosses case from family of Boulder suspect seeking to block their deportation
A federal judge has tossed the case of the family of an Egyptian national who attacked a group of protestors in Colorado, ending their legal bid to block their deportation. The case, brought by Hayam El Gamal, the wife of Mohamed Soliman, ends the family's legal battle to remain in the country. Solimna is accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at pro-Israeli demonstrators in Boulder, Colo., now charged with murder as well as other crimes in connection with the attack. While Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem initially said Soliman's family members were taken into custody to ascertain whether they had any connection with the attack, the agency swiftly moved to deport them. U.S. District Court Judge Orlando Garcia determined he did not have the authority to intervene in the case, saying the matter would instead need to be reviewed by an immigration court judge. 'The Court hastens to remind Petitioners that they still have an avenue for seeking their release from detention while their removal proceedings continue. As alluded to above, the regulations promulgated pursuant to the INA prescribe administrative procedures for obtaining relief from discretionary detention,' Garcia wrote. Garcia previously had blocked deportation of the family while he further weighed the issue, and in dismissing the case, the ruling opens the door to continue with their deportation. But Garcia noted the proceedings determined the family has not been placed in expedited removal proceedings and should therefore make their case to an immigration judge. Soliman, who is from Egypt, came to the U.S. on a tourist visa and then applied for asylum alongside his family. He stands accused of attacking people who were demonstrating on behalf of hostages held by Hamas. Soliman's other charges include 52 counts of attempted first-degree murder, eight counts of first-degree assault, 18 counts of attempted first-degree assault, two counts of third-degree assault, two counts of using an incendiary device and 16 counts of attempted use of an incendiary device. Each of those charges carries penalties of multiple years behind bars.
The Hill
21 hours ago
- The Hill
Judge blocks Trump's asylum ban at southern border
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked President Trump's asylum ban at the southern border, determining it ran afoul of immigration laws protecting the rights of those seeking refuge in the U.S. The decision blocks a Day 1 order from Trump seeking to end asylum for all but those who entered the U.S. at ports of entry – arguing the move was needed to prevent an 'invasion' at the border. But U.S. District Court Judge Randolph Moss said Trump went beyond his authority in drastically limiting asylum for those fleeing persecution and danger. Moss found Trump's order violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which lays out strict guidelines for who qualifies for asylum and how they can seek the protections – including by crossing between ports of entry. 'Nothing in the INA or the Constitution grants the President or his delegees the sweeping authority asserted in the Proclamation and implementing guidance,' Moss wrote in his 128-page opinion. The judge rejected that Trump had inherent presidential authority over admission decisions into the country, even if federal law didn't give him the power. 'To hold otherwise would render much, if not most, of the INA simply optional,' wrote Moss, an appointee of former President Obama. Moss postponed his ruling for 14 days, which gives the administration an opportunity to ask an appeals court to intervene. The legal battle began in early February, just days into Trump's presidency and soon after he signed the proclamation on Inauguration Day. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, 13 anonymous asylum seekers sued alongside three immigration nonprofits, the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Florence Project. The administration had agreed to not deport any of the 13 individuals as the litigation progresses, but Wednesday's ruling now covers anyone impacted by Trump's proclamation nationwide. The judge's decision does not, however, apply to people already removed from the country. Moss noted those cases pose 'difficult questions' and will be addressed later. A number of migrants who have crossed the border in recent years have done so turn themselves over to Border Protection officials in order to make the claim. But the uptick in those seeking the protections over the last several years has made the process a target for Republicans, who argue the system is being abused. Asylum seekers cannot be granted the protections if they are fleeing what is deemed 'generalized violence' and many who seek the status do not receive it when their case is considered by the Department of Homeland Security or in immigration court. But a yearslong backlog in reviewing such cases means applicants may spend years in the U.S. before their claims are fully weighed. During the first Trump administration, Trump used Title 42 to block migrants from seeking asylum at the border, closing off the process and allowing them to be swiftly expelled instead. Former President Biden kept those same limitations in place for over two years.
