Ohio Supreme Court agrees to hear Falfas v. Cedar Fair

Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:23 PM | Contributed by Jeff

The Court on Wednesday announced it would review the case involving Cedar Fair LP and Jacob “Jack” Falfas, the former chief operating officer who had worked for the Sandusky-based amusement park company for 39 years. The legal dispute dates back to June 10, 2010, when Falfas, then 59, had a brief telephone conversation with former Chief Executive Officer Richard Kinzel. Since then, the company and Falfas have disputed whether Falfas resigned or was terminated during the call.

Read more from The Morning Journal.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:32 PM
Tekwardo's avatar

If he's making a play for money, okay. I get it. I personally think Dick did him wrong.

If he's really trying to get the company to hire him back, then he really needs to let it go. At this point, I'm glad there's a new regime running the company.

Website | Flickr | Instagram | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook

Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:40 PM
Jeff's avatar

Yeah, there isn't a unit holder on the planet that would be OK with it, except of course, Falfas himself.

Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Phrazy

Thursday, September 26, 2013 5:50 AM

Would love to hear the arguments. This is so strange because I think both sides are 100% correct. I think Falfas got screwed by Kinzel. I firmly believe that Kinzel terminated him. (For the record, I also believe Kinzel may have no recollection of that happening.)

But, I also believe there is no way in the world that Falfas should be forced back into the mix. The question I ask myself is if I believe that because Ouimet came in and turned things around? Let's assume Kinzel were still there and the company was stagnant. Would I then be more on the side of Falfas and think he should be forced back in by the courts?

I need to go back and review all the information but didn't both sides agree to the binding arbitration?

Thursday, September 26, 2013 7:31 AM

Yes they did, and CF didn't like the arbitrator's decision, thus the trip back to the courts.


You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2022, POP World Media, LLC