Letter to the editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

By Cass Cliatt on Nov. 9, 2007, 9:57 a.m.

This letter to the editor was published in the Nov. 9, 2007, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Princeton's judgment reply

The editorial "Battling Princeton" (Nov. 4) misinforms your readers about the outcome of the pretrial rulings in the lawsuit filed by the Robertson family against Princeton University.

These rulings were on summary judgment motions, not on the facts in the case. The only motions fully granted by the judge favored Princeton. In his rulings on the other motions, including the one cited in your editorial, the judge decided to defer the issues until trial.

But he agreed with Princeton that the governing document for the Robertson Foundation "is clear and unambiguous as to the University being the sole institution to which Foundation funds are to be directed."

The sole purpose of the Robertson gift was to support the graduate program at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. This is exactly how the funds have been used since Marie Robertson made her gift to Princeton 46 years ago.

Princeton believes that these funds should continue to be used as the donor intended. It is her children who are attempting through an expensive lawsuit to seize control of her gift and redirect it to other purposes.

Cass Cliatt is director of media relations for Princeton University.

Related Stories

Judge issues preliminary rulings in Robertson Foundation lawsuit .

New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil Shuster today issued rulings on seven pretrial motions in the lawsuit brought against Princeton University by several members of the Robertson family in July 2002. His seven rulings totaled 355 pages.

University seeks summary judgment on three key Robertson litigation issues .

Attorneys representing Princeton University and four University-designated trustees of the Robertson Foundation today asked New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil H. Shuster to grant summary judgment on three key issues in the lawsuit regarding the Foundation that was filed by members of the Robertson family in July 2002. The Robertson Foundation is organized as a “supporting organization” of the University for the purpose of supporting the graduate program of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.  

Court confirms trial date of Oct. 1 in Robertson case .

New Jersey Superior Court Judge Maria Sypek this week confirmed a trial date of Oct. 1, 2008, to hear the lawsuit brought against Princeton University by several members of the Robertson family in July 2002.

University presents oral arguments in Robertson lawsuit, Nov. 28 .

Princeton University's lead counsel argued Tuesday in support of the University's motion asking New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil H. Shuster to declare by summary judgment that Princeton is and will continue to be the sole beneficiary of the Robertson Foundation, and is and will remain entitled to designate four of the foundation's seven trustees. Douglas S.

Understanding the Robertson v. Princeton settlement .

Presented here is a brief glossary of terms and case history to aid in understanding the Dec. 9, 2008, settlement agreement for the lawsuit that the Robertson family filed against Princeton University in 2002.

Letter to the editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education and Chronicle of Philanthropy - Updated .

This letter to the editor was published in the Feb. 13, 2009 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education and a slightly altered version of this letter was published in the Jan. 29, 2009 issue of the Chronicle of Philanthropy under the headline "Robertson vs. Princeton vs. Donor Intent."

University to present oral arguments in Robertson lawsuit .

On Nov. 28-29, attorneys representing Princeton University and four University-designated trustees of the Robertson Foundation will present oral argument before New Jersey Superior Court Judge Neil H. Shuster in support of four motions for partial summary judgment filed by Princeton, as well as a motion to strike plaintiffs' demand for a jury trial. Attorneys for Princeton will also oppose two motions filed by several members of the Robertson family who initiated the litigation in July 2002.