Robertson trial date pushed back

The six-year-old dispute over the Robertson Foundation’s $900 million endowment will face yet another delay. Superior Court Judge Maria Sypek postponed the trial date from October until January because she is still settling into her role as a Chancery Court judge and has several other cases lined up on her docket, the Times of Trenton reported.

Lead plaintiff William Robertson ’72 blamed the University for the most recent delay.

"They must be very concerned about what will be exposed in the courtroom," he told the Trenton Times. "They are stalling with every device and resource within their power. This is not a typical corporate brawl. This is the University and their largest donor. They don't want the truth to come out."

In a ruling on Tuesday, Sypek also instructed the University to turn over a list of items that have not yet been given to the plaintiffs. Douglas Eakeley, a lawyer for the University and partner at the firm Lowenstein Sandler, told the Trenton Times the list of items had only recently been requested by the plaintiffs.

In the Trenton Times interview, Robertson said the University's goal is to delay the start of the trial for as long as possible.

"I think they have one single strategy to delay it until one of three things happens: We run out of money, time wears us out, or we become ill or die," Robertson said. "They have a strategy to simply string this matter out as long as they possibly can."

But University spokeswoman Emily Aronson said in an e-mail that it’s the Robertsons who have delayed the start of the trial by filing new motions in the case and “making excessive and expanded demands for materials.”

“The University is providing all requested materials and its position on the case remains what it has always been: it is fully confident that it will prevail on the merits and it looks forward to the opportunity to present its case in court," Aronson said.

Robertson said that key witnesses in the case, including his brother John Robertson, have passed away during the protracted legal battle. Former University president Robert Goheen ’40, who negotiated the terms of the original gift, died in March, and former University trustee Jay Sherrerd ’52, who sat on the Robertson Foundation board and was founding chairman of its investment committee, passed away in April. Sherrerd was a defendant in the case.

Eakeley countered that witness depositions have been recorded on videotape, adding that the University was eager to go to court to clear its name.

Sypek is the second judge to preside over the case after former judge Neil Shuster retired on March 1. The case is the largest "donor intent" lawsuit in U.S. history. Together, the two sides have spent $50 million in legal fees since the suit was filed.

Seth Lapidow, a partner at Saul Ewing and attorney for the Robertson family, told The Daily Princetonian last February he was unsure how long the trial will last once opening statements begin.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

"If we have a normal, four-day-a-week, full-day trial schedule, the parties have discussed something on the order of four months," Lapidow said. "It depends on the court's discretion."

The lawsuit has provoked nationwide interest, raising questions about donor rights and the fiduciary duties of nonprofit organizations. The Robertson family alleges that Princeton has misused the Foundation's funds by ignoring the intent of the late donors, Charles Robertson ’26 and his wife Marie. The couple endowed the Foundation with a $35 million gift in 1961.

The Robertsons allege that the University has failed to adequately place Wilson School graduates in federal government jobs, especially those in foreign policy, but the University maintains that it does an adequate job of placing graduates in the public sector. The Trenton Times also reported the University will call witnesses like Gen. David Petraeus GS ’85, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, to illustrate its point.

In January 2006, the University and the Robertson family each filed several motions for partial summary judgment, in which particular facets of the case are decided by the court without a full trial. After hearing oral arguments on the motions in November 2006, Shuster released a 335-page ruling in October 2007.

Both sides scored minor victories, but Shuster declined to rule on whether Princeton was the sole beneficiary of the Robertson Foundation and also reserved judgment on whether the University had exercised proper diligence by investing the Robertson funds with the Princeton Investment Company, which also manages the University's general endowment. The family contends the University has violated one of Charles Robertson's strongest principles: that his donation would remain separate from the University's general fund.