University drafts stipulation as part of Rose Museum suit
by Alana Abramson
Editorial Assistant
News | 10/27/09
Posted online at 1:39 AM EST on 10/27/09
The University is drafting a stipulation for the Rose Art Museum lawsuit, an agreement between attorneys that simplifies or shortens the lawsuit, according to Thomas Reilly, the University's lawyer for the lawsuit.
Reilly said that the stipulation reflects what occurred at that hearing, explaining that as a result of the judge's decision to impose a limited preliminary injunction, the case is now limited to the plaintiffs' ability to control their own donations or those of their ancestors to the Rose.
"The court ruled that the plaintiffs have no right and standing to represent any donors other than themselves or their ancestors, and that is all that's left now for the plaintiffs," he said.
Reilly said he is currently drafting the stipulation, which ultimately will be reviewed by the council, but would not comment further. He could not be reached for further clarification by press time.
The lawsuit, which seeks to preserve the Rose collection intact, was filed by Jonathan Lee, Meryl Rose and Lois Foster on July 27.
The first hearing for the lawsuit took place Oct. 13 at the Suffolk Probate Court, during which Judge Stahlin ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to continue the case and imposed a limited injunction prohibiting Brandeis from selling any artwork provided by the plaintiffs.
Edward T. Dangel, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, was unwilling to be interviewed for the article, saying that he did not have a comment at this time.
Lee said he was currently unaware of the stipulation and consequently could not comment.
"Brandeis never had any intention of selling any artwork donated by any of the plaintiffs or the estates that they represent, specifically the paintings donated by Mildred Lee or any artwork donated by the Fosters.
Brandeis never had any intention of selling any of that: There is no point in arguing about that," said Reilly.
Judith Sizer, the University's legal council, wrote in an Oct. 19 e-mail to the Justice that Rose and Lee have donated $45,000 and $43,880, respectively, to the museum.
Lois Foster and her late husband, Henry, made numerous gifts, including pieces of art to the museum and to the University, Sizer wrote in the e-mail. Lee and Rose have not donated artwork, she wrote.
Reilly said that the stipulation reflects what occurred at that hearing, explaining that as a result of the judge's decision to impose a limited preliminary injunction, the case is now limited to the plaintiffs' ability to control their own donations or those of their ancestors to the Rose.
"The court ruled that the plaintiffs have no right and standing to represent any donors other than themselves or their ancestors, and that is all that's left now for the plaintiffs," he said.
Reilly said he is currently drafting the stipulation, which ultimately will be reviewed by the council, but would not comment further. He could not be reached for further clarification by press time.
The lawsuit, which seeks to preserve the Rose collection intact, was filed by Jonathan Lee, Meryl Rose and Lois Foster on July 27.
The first hearing for the lawsuit took place Oct. 13 at the Suffolk Probate Court, during which Judge Stahlin ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to continue the case and imposed a limited injunction prohibiting Brandeis from selling any artwork provided by the plaintiffs.
Edward T. Dangel, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, was unwilling to be interviewed for the article, saying that he did not have a comment at this time.
Lee said he was currently unaware of the stipulation and consequently could not comment.
"Brandeis never had any intention of selling any artwork donated by any of the plaintiffs or the estates that they represent, specifically the paintings donated by Mildred Lee or any artwork donated by the Fosters.
Brandeis never had any intention of selling any of that: There is no point in arguing about that," said Reilly.
Judith Sizer, the University's legal council, wrote in an Oct. 19 e-mail to the Justice that Rose and Lee have donated $45,000 and $43,880, respectively, to the museum.
Lois Foster and her late husband, Henry, made numerous gifts, including pieces of art to the museum and to the University, Sizer wrote in the e-mail. Lee and Rose have not donated artwork, she wrote.
Be the first to comment on this story