YoungStud Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 I agree after giving the world magnum, millennium, wicked twister, and ttd he did all he could do. I305 was a bonus as well as maverick. Mr. Ouimett has given us gatesleeper and dancee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterfanatic83 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Bro, nobody has even ridden Banshee yet. And that's the best nickname you could come up with? I expect better from you. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedevariouseffect Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 You wouldn't have wanted to work under him man...Ignorant and annoying ass at times 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 That's for sure. And he certainly had a different standard for himself, his kin and his pals than he did for other employees. He was from a very different era, sayeth one of the older peeps on this board, rather ironically. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leland Wykoff Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 Perhaps Cedar Fair will take advantage of "executive bonus claw back provisions" to cost recover part of the losses due to the Falfas episode. When performance bonuses are granted and paid based upon false numbers, the SEC allows for a claw back of the overpaid benefit. If I were Richard Kinzel, or his council, I would be concerned. Given Mr. Kinzel may have filed a false report with the SEC concerning the Jack Falfas departure, well, it could result in recovery efforts by Cedar Fair. For an interesting read concerning poor corporate governance (involving another party with Cleveland ties) please see this recent Plain-Dealer article: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2013/05/pilot_flying_j_director_overse.html The SEC moved to strengthen corporate governance by allowing for executive bonus claw backs following the shenanigans at Saks Fifth Avenue. In the Saks case the resigning executives who allegedly engineered the fraud, and profited by receiving quarterly bonuses, for which they did not in reality qualify, kept the ill gotten gains. Saks was not by any means the only such case of poor corporate governance related to executive over-payments. But it helped end the practice and spur the SEC onto tighter rules and regulations. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milesharrison Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Quick update this week: http://www.morningjournal.com/general-news/20140413/ohio-supreme-court-hears-argument-between-cedar-point-parent-company-former-employee 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRider Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I think the whole issue remains the reinstatement of Falfas, something that Cedar Fair does not want. Since Ohio is an At Will State, can't they fire an employee without cause? I understand the backpay and benefits issues, but I don't see how a court can order a company to reinstate/employee an individual. Just another example of Kinzel loosing Cedar Fair more Nickels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 That would depend on the terms of the contract between the company and Mr. Falfas. As we have seen with another appellate decision recently in another state, things may not be as they seem, skim milk may be masquerading as cream. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leland Wykoff Posted April 20, 2014 Author Share Posted April 20, 2014 An excellent case review featuring specific observations concerning the supreme court arguments and analysis. Worth the read: http://www.legallyspeakingohio.com/2014/04/whats-on-their-minds-enforcing-a-shotgun-marriage-cedar-fair-l-p-v-jacob-falfas/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterfanatic83 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 That looks like something right out of my "Fundamentals of Business Law" textbook. I'm definitely interested to see what the courts do about the question of demanding specific performance, because that was one of the topics of the class a few weeks ago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 "There's more than corn in Indiana." This is not an off topic post. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastien6221 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 ^true......i for one am a hoosier, born and raised.....and still live here lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Court: Falfas NOT Entitled to be reinstated http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2014/09/18/Court-Falfas-not-entitled-to-be-reinstated-as-COO-of-Cedar-Fair.html 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leland Wykoff Posted September 18, 2014 Author Share Posted September 18, 2014 Preview of Supreme Court Ruling here: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2014/2014-Ohio-3943.pdf Note this is not the published and final ruling--some minor changes may occur prior to it being reported [published]. This is a bad omen for binding arbitration. This sets the mold for challenge of a variety of rulings by arbitration panels. It is the job of those drafting agreements to be clear as to the terms, conditions, and remedies of those agreements. The court should not have placed its noise under the tent of arbitration. No abuse legal occurred here. Just poor drafting of an employment contract. For the pitiful, detail starved, Sandusky Register report please see: http://www.sanduskyregister.com/news/business/6110506 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 Why is this a bad omen for arbitration? Specific performance has never been preferred in employment cases...unless the contract specifically allowed for such, which this one did not. Mr. Falfas is still entitled to monetary damages... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 ^ Is that another court case in the making? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted September 18, 2014 Share Posted September 18, 2014 No. It's the same one...continuing, remanded to the lower court to decide damages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed Bratton Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Jacob T. “Jack” Falfas is not entitled to be reinstated as chief operating officer of Cedar Fair, owner of Sandusky’s Cedar Park, the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously ruled today. http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2014/09/18/Court-Falfas-not-entitled-to-be-reinstated-as-COO-of-Cedar-Fair.html Why is that sentence so funny to me? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leland Wykoff Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 Excellent analysis and brief on the Jack Falfas Ohio Supreme Court ruling: http://www.legallyspeakingohio.com/2014/09/merit-decision-former-cedar-fair-coo-does-not-get-his-job-back-cedar-fair-l-p-v-falfas/ 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leland Wykoff Posted October 3, 2014 Author Share Posted October 3, 2014 Legal analysis of Ohio Supreme Court ruling: http://www.exemplify.com/employment-agreement-dispute Legal eagles will enjoy this read. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.