Kent State University v. Ford

26 N.E.3d 868 (2015)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Kent State University v. Ford

Ohio Court of Appeals
26 N.E.3d 868 (2015)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Play video

Facts

In 2008, Kent State University (plaintiff) hired Gene Ford (codefendant) as head coach of the men's basketball team. The contract contained a liquidated-damages provision that said if Ford resigned before its expiration, he would have to pay the university an amount equal to his salary for the remainder of the contract based on Kent State’s “investment in [Ford’s] continued employment.” In 2010, the parties negotiated a new five-year contract that increased Ford’s salary to $300,000 and contained the same liquidated-damages provision. A year later, Ford resigned and accepted a position coaching at Bradley University (codefendant) for $400,000. Although Kent State hired a replacement almost immediately, it sued Ford and Bradley seeking damages. Ford argued Kent State suffered no damages as a result of his departure. Kent State officials testified that the liquidated damages covered costs associated with finding a replacement coach, staff transitions, adverse effects on the program, and lost ticket sales. Other coaches had the same provision. Kent State always used salary as the basis because it estimated that a coach’s departure cost the program about that much, but had not done a financial analysis to substantiate it. Kent State also showed Ford understood the liquidated-damages provision, tried to avoid it negotiating the contracts, and remained concerned about it when he resigned. The court granted Kent State summary judgment awarding the specified liquidated damages. Ford appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Grendell, J.)

Dissent (Cannon, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership