The Association of Alumni's lawsuit against Dartmouth will go to trial following the failure of the College's motion to dismiss the case. The court ruled in favor of the Association on all counts considered in the motion in Grafton County Superior Court last Friday.
The Association originally filed the lawsuit after the College's Board of Trustees voted in September to add eight new members, who will be selected by the Board. This change ended a century-long tradition of parity between the number of trustees elected by alumni and selected by the Board itself.
The case will now move to trial following a process of discovery whereby the College and Association share their information.
"There are certain things we have some expectations of finding," Frank Gado '58, a member of the Association's executive committee, said. "Clearly we are very gratified that the judge has ruled as he did -- it certainly bolsters our confidence."
Robert Donin, Dartmouth's general counsel, said the College would prevail once the facts of the case are challenged in court.
"We are, of course, disappointed that the College's motion to dismiss has been denied," Donin said in a statement to The Dartmouth. "This lawsuit is not in the best interest of the College or its students -- and it is regrettable that it will continue to drain the College's time and resources. We remain confident that when the case moves beyond allegations to evidence, the suit will be shown to be without merit. We are eager for the case to proceed to trial so we can secure a ruling on the merits."
In ruling on motions to dismiss, courts generally assume that most of the facts alleged by the plaintiff are true. An exception to this practice was made in the Association's case, however, on the question of whether the College is contractually obligated to maintain parity on the Board.
In the Jan. 10 hearing on the motion, the College argued that the existence of a contract must be determined legally. By making this argument, the College allowed the court to consider the contract question when deciding whether the motion to dismiss should be granted.
The history of the alleged contract dates to an 1891 Board of Trustees' resolution and the surrounding negotiations. The resolution specified that the next five trustees appointed to the Board in 1891 should be elected by alumni. At the time, the resolution created parity between the number of alumni-elected and "charter" trustees, who are selected by the Board itself.
The key issue in the Association's case is whether this resolution, and the subsequent tradition of parity on the Board, legally bind the College to continue this balance.
The presiding judge found that the Association provided "sufficient evidence" that a contract for parity exists to survive a motion to dismiss. This evidence includes the Association's alleged promise following the 1891 resolution that it would help fundraise for the College in exchange for alumni-elected seats on the Board. This agreement constitutes the "definite terms" of a legal contract, the court said.
The court also rejected the College's assertion that the Association, as an unincorporated organization, could not enter into legal contracts.
The ruling on the motion to dismiss does not constitute a final decision on the contract question. Rather, the judge's decision establishes that there is enough evidence for the Association to move forward with its claims.
The timing of the news on the litigation has led alumni leaders to question whether College President James Wright's 2009 departure from Dartmouth, announced Monday morning, is a reaction to the continuation of the Association's legal action.
"I generally don't believe in coincidences like this, particularly when [Wright] had been so forceful in denigrating the Association of Alumni lawsuit," Joe Asch '79, an outspoken critic of the Wright administration, said. "I just think it's important that people understand the link between this motion to dismiss, the denial of the court and the timing of the resignation."
Chairman of the Board of Trustees Ed Haldeman '70 discounted any connection between the ongoing governance controversies and Wright's announcement.
"The governance issues had no impact on Jim Wright's decision," Haldeman said in an interview with The Dartmouth.
