- 11 -
compensate Mr. Reisman for any alleged personal injuries.
The importance of Mr. Reisman’s leaving the university in
order to settle the dispute was conveyed in a letter written by
one of Mr. Reisman’s attorneys to Mr. Goldfarb, which stated:
As I conveyed to you, Steve [Goldfarb], Dr. Reisman’s
preference is to structure a settlement in which he
would remain at the university. You indicated,
however, that the only settlement offer which Case
Western Reserve University would consider would be one
in which Dr. Reisman leaves the university * * *
According to testimony provided by Mr. Makee, CWRU would
consider only a settlement with Mr. Reisman’s leaving the
university because he was unhappy with the university and the
university was unhappy with him. Mr. Makee also indicated that
Mr. Reisman had engaged in what the university considered
disruptive conduct as a faculty member. Thus, the university was
concerned that if it settled the litigation, and Mr. Reisman
remained at CWRU, there would be no guaranty that he would not
continue that kind of conduct. Finally, Mr. Makee testified that
if Mr. Reisman refused to resign and continued to teach at CWRU,
then the university’s position was to pay nothing to settle any
of the outstanding claims, except perhaps a nominal sum of about
$5,000 as a nuisance payment. CRWU’s position was based on the
fact that it had won the Federal age discrimination complaint,
which was Mr. Reisman’s primary lawsuit. As a result, CRWU was
prepared to defend the Federal case on appeal and the State case
as it was developing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011