Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Update: Fired Columnist Wins Lawsuit
Self | March 6, 2003 | Igor Birman

Posted on 03/07/2003 9:52:52 AM PST by calif_reaganite

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MARCH 6, 2003

Contact: Christopher Mays 530-902-4444

Fired Conservative Columnist Wins Lawsuit; Editor-in-Chief Admits Guilt

Davis — Fired conservative columnist, Igor Birman, was awarded $583.33 in lost wages by the Yolo County Small Claims Court, after Fitzgerald Vo, his former employer and editor-in-chief of The California Aggie admitted breaching Birman's contract.

After a Court-requested mediation session, Vo acknowledged that Birman's dismissal on New Year's Day of 2003 was in violation of the terms of the employment contract that both sides signed in October 2002. Birman was then awarded the full amount of damages sought from the Aggie.

Birman was dismissed from his position as the sole conservative columnist at the Aggie, the daily student newspaper at UC Davis, by Fitzgerald Vo, despite a contract lasting until the end of June 2003. In his termination notice, Vo cited Birman's "tendency to enrage members of the opposing causes" as the reason for the dismissal. Shortly thereafter, Birman filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit against the newspaper.

"I strongly believe that people should be held accountable for their actions," Birman said. "When Mr. Vo fired me, not only did he commit a travesty by silencing the only conservative voice at the Aggie, he actually broke the law. His reckless disregard for a binding contract was an inexcusable display of arrogance. Today, however, Mr. Vo was held responsible for his actions and justice was served," he added.

Birman further pointed out that he intends to donate the entire amount of the damages to the Young Conservatives Foundation. "When I filed this case, I was seeking a moral victory, not personal monetary gain. That goal has been accomplished. The money awarded will go towards strengthening the conservative movement both at UC Davis and across California, so that conservative thought is given an opportunity to grow in this climate of general hostility," Birman said.

The case is Birman vs. The California Aggie, C.V.CL 0353. Birman may be reached at 510-714-0440 and his contract, termination notice and the Court’s disposition will be made available upon request.

-30-


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: birman; campusliberals; column; conservative; correctness; davis; freedomofspeech; mediabias; pc; politicallycorrect; ucdavis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: lawdude
With all due respect, duh! Yes, a breach of contract may result in a lawsuit, and persons damaged by same may file suit. But does that make a breach "illegal," in the usual sense of the word?
21 posted on 03/07/2003 11:13:03 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pittsburgh gop guy
There's no money for pain and suffering in a breach of contract case unless you proceed under a tort theory, e.g., tortious interference with a contract. Even then, good luck.
22 posted on 03/07/2003 11:14:21 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
I'm afraid this is a rather hollow victory.
If people are under the impression some kind of "bias" has been proven, they're woefully wrong.

The man was able to recoup a weeks pay, or so.
That's *it*.

Now had he sued in Superior Court (<--?) for punitive damages -- based upon an allegation he had been the victim of discrimination -- he proved was the direct result of his ideological belief(s)?
Fine. Great. Hallelujah!
I'd buy beers for the house.

But that's not what happened, here.

Moreover, to aggravate matters for this guy even worse?
I hope he didn't collect *any* UC benefits while between jobs, following his "illegal" termination.
Because if he did?
There's a very good possibility the State of California will come after him to be reimbursed the benefits they've paid him over the time covered by this "settlement."
With as broke as CA is, that scenario's highly likely.

So, he'd better hang on to that whopping $500 (& change) for a while, in lieu of *donating* it to anyone.

Sorry, I would've LOVED to have learned this guy had really let 'em have it.

...with both barrels.

23 posted on 03/07/2003 11:48:42 AM PST by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
awarded $583.33 in lost wages

What about the punitive damages, oh say , $50,000,000 so they won't do it again

24 posted on 03/07/2003 11:59:39 AM PST by Mister Baredog ((God Bless GW Bush))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
Well, actually, it is a breach of "private law" (the "law" created by the contracting parties and binding upon them).
25 posted on 03/07/2003 12:39:07 PM PST by Notwithstanding (What have you done for LIFE lately?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
Vo cited Birman's "tendency to enrage members of the opposing causes" as the reason for the dismissal.

The fact that a student newspaper column could "enrage members of opposing causes" should be meat and potatoes for a student paper.

Vo's a ho.

26 posted on 03/07/2003 12:42:02 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
Update: Fired Columnist Wins Lawsuit

I must have dyslexia. I thougt it said, "Fired Communist Wins Lawsuit."

27 posted on 03/07/2003 12:48:05 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (This space left intentionally blank.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
One could assume from the article that the columnist "gets" to return to his former post until his contract expires this June.

All together now: Can we say, "Hostile work environment!"

I'm glad he won. Blubba J. x42 and his mouthpiece, Joe Lockhart, ought to get a heads up out of this, rather than telling Rush Limbaugh to "shut his mouth" for dissenting with them. (Does blubba hate Rush or WHAT?)
28 posted on 03/07/2003 1:12:06 PM PST by GretchenEE (You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
wasn't that the issue, that the plaintif wasn't paid what he was owed when the contract was breached?
29 posted on 03/07/2003 1:41:50 PM PST by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mister Baredog
Small Claims Court does not provide for that.
30 posted on 03/07/2003 1:43:42 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit ( Its time to trap some RATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
A legally binding contract means exactly what it implies. If there were no "law" involved how does one take one to court to remedy its being broken?
31 posted on 03/07/2003 3:34:25 PM PST by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
Mazel tov, on your victory!
32 posted on 03/07/2003 10:32:43 PM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calif_reaganite
Outstanding!
33 posted on 03/08/2003 9:09:08 AM PST by bytesmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson