Both parties in the current alumni lawsuit against the College told The Dartmouth that they may file motions for summary judgment, in which the judge decides the case without a full trial. The College's motion would argue that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue, while the plaintiff's motion would seek to expedite the case.
The College may file a summary judgment in July if information gathered during the suit's discovery period provides support for the College's position that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue, and that the terms of the dismissal of the previous alumni lawsuit against the College preclude alumni from filing the current lawsuit, College general counsel Bob Donin said. The discovery period will end in June, according to a recently agreed upon procedural schedule, he added.
The discovery period allows the attorneys to "ferret out what the other side's case looks like," the plaintiff's attorney, Eugene Van Loan, said.
"In the last lawsuit, discovery was in progress when the Association of Alumni and the College decided to file a joint stipulation of dismissal," Donin said.
The College would argue in its motion that the principle of res judicata bars the plaintiffs from pursuing the current lawsuit, contending that it is based on claims that were already settled in the agreement to dismiss the previous suit. The motion would also contend that the alumni in the suit lack standing to sue, an argument the College has already outlined in a summary statement filed on March 23. The statement argues that the Association of Alumni has not authorized the individual alumni who brought the current lawsuit to litigate on its behalf, which Donin asserted makes them third-party beneficiaries who lack standing to sue.
Van Loan said he is confident that any College motion for summary judgment will fail, calling the motion a "hurdle" that the plaintiffs will "overcome."
Van Loan said he did not know when the trial will begin should the College decide not to file a motion or should the motion fail.
"One of the problems is that all lawyers have schedules we have to live by, and the judges aren't bound to any schedule," he said. "All things equal, I would expect that when [the summary judgment motion by the College] is resolved, we will have more discovery, and we will have [the case] ready for trial on merits by fall or early winter."
Van Loan may also decide to file a motion of summary judgement to speed proceedings, he said.
In February 2008, the Grafton County Superior Court refused to grant the College's motion of dismissal in the previous lawsuit, The Dartmouth previously reported. Van Loan said the implications of this ruling for the current case warrant further investigation.
"Some rulings have been made in the [2007 Association of Alumni] case that say the suit has some merit," Van Loan said. "Whether these are enough to justify a motion for summary judgment is something we are considering but haven't decided on yet."
The current suit is the second in two years to center on the issue of parity on the College's Board of Trustees between alumni-elected and Board-selected members. The first suit, brought by the Association of Alumni in October 2007, argued that the Board's recent decision to add eight Board-selected members violated an 1891 document that the plaintiffs said legally required the Board to maintain parity. The Association withdrew the suit in spring 2008 after alumni opposed to the suit swept all 11 seats in elections to fill the Association's executive committee.
The seven alumni who filed the current suit are not acting on behalf of the Association.
