The College Faculty

See the full PDF of this opinion here.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR GREENE COUNTY, OHIO

PETER TOWNSEND, et al.
Plaintiffs-Appellants
v.
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY
Defendant-Appellee

OPINION
C.A. CASE NO. 2008 CA 103
T.C. NO. 2008 CV 0300
(Civil appeal from Common Pleas Court)

Rendered on the 29th day of May, 2009.

W. EVAN PRICE II, Atty. Reg. No. 0056134 and MICHAEL R. GOODSTEIN, Atty. Reg. No. 0080476 and SABRINA HAURIN, Atty. Reg. No. 0079321, One Columbus, 10 West Broad Street, 21st Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants

KATHLEEN M. TRAFFORD, Atty. Reg. No. 0021753 and KENDALL V. SHAW, Atty. Reg. No. 0076556, 41 South High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215
Attorney for Defendant-Appellee

WILLIAM R. GROVES, Atty. Reg. No. 0009440, One S. Limestone Street, Suite 800, Springfield, Ohio 45502
Attorney for Defendant-Appellee

WOLFF, J. (by assignment)

The appellants, a group of tenured Antioch College professors, appeal from the trial court’s judgment entry dismissing their amended complaint against appellee Antioch University pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(1) and Civ.R. 12(B)(6).

The appellants advance three assignments of error. First, they contend the trial court erred in finding, as a matter of law, that the relief they sought required judicial intervention in the management and operation of Antioch College. Second, they claim the trial court erred in finding, as a matter of law, that a “Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures” manual constituted a personal-service contract. Third, they assert that the trial court erred in finding, as a matter of law, that they had an adequate remedy in the form of money damages for the breach of contract alleged in their amended complaint. Continue Reading »

From: theantiochpapers.org/document/116/adcil-in-exile-townsend-et-al-v-antioch-university

On May 12, 2009, the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second Appellate District, heard an appeal on behalf of the members of the former faculty of Antioch College regarding reinstatement of their recently dismissed lawsuit against Antioch University.

In 2007 members of the former faculty of Antioch College filed a lawsuit alleging that Antioch University violated the Antioch “College Faculty Personnel Policies”. According to this contractual document, the University is mandated to seek “less drastic means” to closure through “consultation” with the College’s Administrative Council, AdCil. Specifically, the University is required to work with AdCil to development “a plan and timetable for abating financial emergency” or closure. The faculty lawsuit alleges that Antioch University officers refused to meet with AdCil to develop this plan or explore less drastic means.

A ruling on the appeal is expected sometime within the next 12 weeks.

For background information see The College Faculty website

From the Yellow Springs News – January 8th, 2009
By Diane Chiddister

The former faculty of Antioch College recently appealed a November decision from the Greene County Common Pleas Court to dismiss the faculty lawsuit against Antioch University. The appeal, filed several weeks ago, will take about eight or nine months to work its way through the court system, according to Attorney Evan Price of Columbus, who represents the faculty.

On Nov. 26 Judge Stephen Wolaver of the Common Pleas Court dismissed the faculty lawsuit, which alleges that the university trustees breached their contractural responsibilities to faculty by declaring a state of financial exigency and suspending operations when less drastic measures were available, and also by making this decision without consulting faculty. These actions violated contractual obligations as stated in the Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures, the lawsuit said.

Read the full article at http://www.ysnews.com/stories/2009/01/010809_antioch.html

The day before thanksgiving Judge Wolover dismissed the faculty lawsuit, arguing essentially that he has no authority to rule on our case.  His frame of reference was that the Court could not question a business decision (even if it was a bad one), and that the complaint was in the nature of personal services contract issues, and the faculty had other remedies available to them (suing for damages due to breach of contract).  Tuesday December 1, the faculty legal group conferred by phone with Evan Price, our attorney and voted unanimously to move forward immediately with an appeal.  Evan reports that because the judge ruled on a matter of law, not on the facts of our case, that an appeal will be (legally speaking) straightforward.  It will involve a relatively short  brief, and a response to the other side’s brief.  The appeal will move quickly through the appeal court process (20-day intervals for filing, responding, responding to response, and a time certain for the Appellate court) and we could have a decision by April.  Evan thinks we have a good chance of winning our appeal, in which case the complaint would be sent back to Judge Wolover for continuation.

The appeals court consists of a three judge panel, from among the five listed below.  We are in the Ohio 2nd Court, see below.

Ohio Second Court of Appeals:
Appellate Judges:
James A. Brogan
Mike Fain
William H. Wolff, Jr.
Mary E. Donovan
Thomas J. Grady

Clark County Courthouse
101 N. Limestone Street
Springfield, Ohio 45502

Ph.: 937.328.2653
Fax: 937.328.2652

Online resources:
District 2 Opinions
Weekly Docket
Local Rules
found at:

www.sconet.state.oh.us/District_Courts/Districts/dc02.asp

See attached documents for more information:

• faculty-lawsuit-appeal-doc-1
• faculty-lawsuit-appeal-doc-2

The following depositions were recently released.

• Eric Bates Deposition – June 26, 2008 PDF
• Amy Chappell – September 5, 2008 PDF
• Neils Lyster – September 5, 2008 PDF

PDF version available

October 1, 2008

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dear Chancellor Murdock and Chair Zucker:

Thank you for your letter of last March 21 responding to ours of March 14 (copies enclosed for your convenience). We were tempted to respond at the time, but thought it best to await further developments in the negotiations which were then moving rapidly. Now, with issues remaining unresolved but with a less turbulent situation in the new academic year underway, members of our staff, with the general secretary participating, have once again turned our attention to Antioch. We have come to the view that the closing of Antioch College, whether it proves to be temporary or permanent, is an event the AAUP needs to address. We have agreed that our focus should be upon the governance issues raised by the university’s closing of a core component of the institution and, indeed, its founding college. Among additional issues to be considered are the governance implications for the continuing institution, namely, whether, without the college, Antioch University will operate in accordance with basic principles of academic governance as enunciated in the enclosed Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. As to Antioch College itself, we shall likely want to address the prospects of whether and in what form Antioch College will resume, and indeed, whether there was a realistic alternative to closing it when that was done.

In situations such as Antioch’s that present developments of basic concern to the academic community, our experience has indicated that it is desirable, in fairness to the institutional administration, to the affected faculty members, and to the institution as a whole, to establish an ad hoc committee composed of persons who have had no previous involvement with the particular matter, to conduct its own full inquiry and prepare a report. The general secretary has accordingly authorized the appointment of such a committee, charging it with reporting to the Association’s standing Committee on College and University Governance.

The following persons have accordingly been appointed to serve as the ad hoc committee charged with investigating the case of Antioch University and the closing of Antioch College:

Professor Diane C. Zannoni, chair
Department of Economics
Trinity College, Connecticut

Professor Ronald G. Ehrenberg
Department of Industrial and Labor Relations and Economics
Cornell University

Professor Rudy Fichtenbaum
Department of Economics
Wright State University

Professor Duane Storti
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Washington – Seattle

We shall welcome your cooperation and shall be back in touch with you when we have dates to propose for a committee visit.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

Enclosures
cc: Dr. David Caruso, President, Antioch University New England
Dr. Barbara Gellman-Danley, President, Antioch University McGregor
Dr. Neal King, President, Antioch University Los Angeles
Dr. Cassandra Manuelito-Kerkvliet, President, Antioch University Seattle
Dr. Michael Mulnix, President, Antioch University Santa Barbara
Dr. Laurien Alexandre, Director, PhD in Leadership & Change Program Antioch University
Antioch AAUP Membership
Ad hoc Committee

Hi Folks,

The Faculty lawsuit has been moving forward steadily, though quietly. I’ve taken the baton from Peter Townsend in coordinating communication, and thought that we’re way past due in providing an update on the various pieces of the legal puzzle that have been unfolding during the past few months.

a) Some may know that Eric Bates, one of the ACCC negotiators, was deposed June 26th.  Due to the confidentiality agreements between the ACCC and the University in their negotiations, the text of the deposition has not yet been released.  University attorneys are still reviewing the text of the deposition, and it should be released soon.  We’ll post it as soon as it’s made available.

b) The Greene County judge has not yet ruled on the University’s motion to dismiss the Faculty lawsuit.  There is no legal deadline for him to do so, and his ruling could come tomorrow or months from now.

c) We’re moving ahead with depositions, and have scheduled two Trustees to be deposed in early September.  Other Trustees and the Chancellor are in the cue.

d) Faculty counsel sent a request to University counsel for electronic documents on July 11.  Most importantly, the request asked the University to produce all e-mails to and from the Chancellor starting in January of ‘07.  We have received a written response, and should be receiving the documents shortly.  At that point we will have to review what has been released, to examine critical absences, and may have to seek the court’s help in compelling production of relevant electronic documents, including, if necessary, forensic retrieval.

On behalf of the faculty I’d like to thank all of you who have supported us in this legal action.  The process is long and painstaking, and of course very expensive, but I’m convinced that the lawsuit (a) has been a primary force in keeping the Board and University at the negotiating table, and (b) has played a very important role in excavating the Board and University processes that led to the closure of the College.  I hope you will continue to show your generosity in this effort to get at the truth and to bring about an autonomous, viable and thriving Antioch College.  Contributions for the Faculty Legal Fund can be directed to the College Revival Fund folks.

For the Faculty,

Bob Devine

PDF Available

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF GREENE COUNTY, OHIO

PETER TOWNSEND, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v.
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY,
Defendant.

Case No. 2008 CV 0300
Judge Wolaver

PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

I. INTRODUCTION
The Court should deny Defendant Antioch University’s Motion to Dismiss because Plaintiffs, the tenured faculty members of Antioch College (the “College Faculty”), are not seeking specific performance of the provisions of a personal services contract and they are not asking the Court to step into Defendant’s shoes and make decisions regarding the operation of the College. Rather, the College Faculty seeks specific performance of Defendant’s contractual obligation to implement less drastic measures than closing the College in order to alleviate the College’s financial problems. Specifically, Section IV A 56 of the College’s Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures (“the Contract”) permits Defendant to declare financial exigency and close the College only when “an imminent financial crisis exists which threatens the survival of the College and cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.” (emphasis added).
Continue Reading »

Hi Folks,

Perhaps, lest I sound like an apologist for Antioch University, I should remind you that I am the lead plaintiff in the faculty lawsuit. I am an advocate for fighting the University in every legal way in order to preserve Antioch College as we all have known it.

Some of you know how strident I have been in trying to persuade all who would listen that no one should consider keeping even a pencil labeled “Antioch College” or “Antioch anything” if the University prevails and the College closes. Much less steal anything the University genuinely values.

Based on how nicely Toni, Andrzej, Lynda Sirk, and Mary Lou LaPierre have dealt with Antioch College this year, if the University prevails I expect to have a search warrant executed to search my apartment for any college “treasure”. If I were stupid enough to have stolen (kept) College (University) property, I probably deserve the legal consequences I am sure Toni and Andrej would gleefully impose on me. Continue Reading »

Thanks for asking, thanks for caring about Antioch.

In order to follow the faculty lawsuit, you kind of need a blow-by-blow.

When we re-filed the suit, we included a motion for a preliminary injunction which would prevent AU from selling anything while the suit was in process. The suit includes a permanent injunction, to be imposed if we win the suit.

The judge decided to have an evidentiary hearing (on April 1) to help him rule on the preliminary injunction.

On Wednesday, 26 March AU deposed Bob Devine. Bob did a great job! Nothing was brought out that we don’t already know about. Continue Reading »