University drops lawsuit against Occupy the Farm protesters

Related Posts

A lawsuit filed by the UC Board of Regents against 15 members of Occupy the Farm was dropped Wednesday.

Filed by the UC on behalf of UC Berkeley, a statement released by the defendants’ legal counsel, Michael Siegel of Siegel & Yee, on Wednesday announced that the university would no longer be pursuing legal action against protesters involved in the Gill Tract encampment in Albany.

“We are not at all surprised that UC has walked away from what amounts to a frivolous lawsuit against a group of community activists committed to promoting sustainable urban agriculture on public lands,” said Stefanie Rawlings, one of the lawsuit defendants, in the statement. “What they need to do now is take the next step and let the public tend the crops.”

Campus spokesperson Dan Mogulof said that while university attorneys were confident they would prevail, the decision to suspend the lawsuit was made in light of the fact that the campus has regained control of the tract, allowing research to resume.  The cost of continuing litigation and the lengthy process were also contributing factors, according to Mogulof.

“This is about trespassing,” Mogulof said. “The decision was the result of careful cost-benefit analysis, and the fact that our primary goals were achieved.”

Mogulof said if future attempts to interfere with research at the Gill Tract were to arise, the campus could potentially resume litigation.

Adelyn Baxter is the news editor.

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • guest

    drop the lawsuit ??????    WHY ???????         ILLEGAL TRESPASS   –  PERIOD ….   INVOKE IT …    to not do so will only encourage more leftist tantrums ……

  • Current student

    Drop the lawsuit, and instead send in the the armored vehicle to take of these fleabaggers.

    Works for me.

  • Guest


    Campus spokesperson Dan Mogulof said that while university attorneys were confident they would prevail, the decision to suspend the lawsuit was made in light of the fact that the campus has regained control of the tract, allowing research to resume.  The cost of continuing litigation and the lengthy process were also contributing factors, according to Mogulof.”  

    In a lawsuit like this, the University, had they won, would be awarded costs. You don’t back away when you’re sure you’re going to win.

    • Guest

       Sure you do, numbnuts.  If your goals have already been achieved, why spend $500,000 to receive a guaranteed $300,000.  If your goals included punishing the offenders by hitting them in the pocketbook, that was achieved with their having to hire lawyers to defend them up to this point  (even lawyers that agree with you and represent you charge you fees).

      • I had this same issue with a dirtbag who contracted with me to do some work a few years back, and left me hanging for $20-25K in back pay and materials. I could pony up the $8-10K and sue him and win. The problem is in collecting, given that he’s broke, out of business, living on Social Security, has no other assets, and is currently upside down in his own home. He already had $120-150K in judgements against him and his sole proprietor business, so I would have had to stand in line with everyone else. Dropping a lawsuit isn’t always an acknowledgement that the other side is right. Sometimes it’s a logical, albeit painful business decision.

    • Carlos

       In the same mode, guest, the occupiers would not have stopped fighting if their cause was true.

    • Guest

       um, being awarded anything won’t mean much when the defendents are a bunch of jobless fleabaggers with a net worth of $0