The Robertson family filed papers yesterday in opposition to the University's motion to dismiss the lawsuit to reclaim the funds of the Robertson Foundation, the $550 million endowment for the Wilson School.
The plaintiffs claimed in their opposition papers that there was no basis for a dismissal of the lawsuit and argued that there were factual errors in the motion.
"Defendants' motion shows that they have lost sight of their moral and legal obligations as the stewards of the Robertsons' extraordinary gift," the plaintiffs argued. They further claimed that the defendants unfairly dismissed, "Charles and Marie Robertson's 'expressions of donative intent' as 'legally insignificant.' "
In a preliminary written statement yesterday responding to these papers, defense lawyer Douglas Eakeley said that the plaintiffs were misguided and argued that the University-designated Trustees of the foundation have acted appropriately and made every attempt to fulfill its goals.
"The shrillness of [the plaintiffs'] papers is indicative of the lack of merit of their arguments," he said. Furthermore, he said that the lawsuit was the result of a "fundamental misconception" that the University was trying to control the separate endowment.
In bringing the suit last July, the plaintiffs claimed that the University was misusing the money given in 1961 by Charles Robertson '26 to support the school. They said that because few Wilson School graduate students go on to public service careers, especially in international relations, the school was failing to live up to the mission of the foundation. They also alleged that a change in the investment company that manages the foundation threatens the independence of the foundation from the rest of the University's endowment.
The University and the other defendants, including President Tilghman, filed a motion to dismiss for summary judgment of the lawsuit on Nov. 4. A tentative hearing was scheduled on the matter for Dec. 6, but the plaintiffs received an extension until yesterday to file papers in opposition to the motion.