High Court upholds dismissal of R-MWC coed suits

The former Randolph-Macon Woman’s College’s decision to adopt coeducation was reaffirmed Friday when the Virginia Supreme Court ruled to uphold the dismissal of two cases challenging the enrollment of men.

“I felt very gratified that the court upheld what we believed to be our duty, our responsibility,” said Lucy Hooper, an alumna and president of the board of trustees, which voted to adopt coeducation in an effort to financially strengthen the college.

“These were heart-wrenching decisions but we believed they were right, and we still do.”

Members of Preserve Educational Choice, a nonprofit that funded the litigation against the college, said they were disappointed in the decision but probably would not bring further legal challenges to the coed Randolph College.

“I don’t think we’ve left any legal stone unturned,” said Anne Yastremski, an alumna and executive director of PEC. “I’m not sure what else we can do at this point.”

Both cases originally were dismissed in January 2007 by Lynchburg Circuit Court Judge Leyburn Mosby Jr.

On April 14, a panel of seven Virginia Supreme Court justices heard 30 minutes of arguments on each case. Justices ultimately affirmed the dismissal of the cases but also could have sent the suits to trial or ordered anything else.

In the first case, plaintiffs alleged the college broke a contract with students when it adopted coeducation. Attorneys argued the contract was implied through recruitment materials and other documents.

Students who brought the case originally sought to prevent the college from enacting its plan to go coed until fall 2010, by which time they would have each graduated.

Randolph College countered that promotional materials alone do not constitute a contract.

Justices affirmed the dismissal of the case with a 5-2 vote. In the majority opinion, the court agreed with the college.

“There is no language in any of these documents in which the College made a clear, definite, and specific promise to operate a college predominantly for women during the duration of the plaintiffs’ academic studies at the College,” the opinion states.

Justice Donald W. Lemons and Senior Justice Charles S. Russell dissented.

“I do not fundamentally disagree with the principles of law cited by the majority. I simply disagree with their application in this case,” the opinion states. “ … Especially troubling is the grant of a (dismissal) in the face of allegations of oral promises from the College to the Students which can only be tested at trial. The Students may or may not prevail at trial, but that question is not properly before us.”

Diane Montgomery, the president of PEC, called the dissenting opinion “dead-on accurate.”

“There’s no way that either of these cases should have been totally dismissed. It can’t just be left like this,” she said.

In the second case, plaintiffs argued the coeducational Randolph College is a charitable corporation that cannot use money or assets donated for R-MWC, which had adopted the mission of educating primarily women.

Plaintiffs also hoped the case would provide legal protection against the controversial sale of four paintings from the college’s Maier Museum of Art.

The college argued the school has the right to divert the use of donated money. The college also held that students do not qualify as beneficiaries and that donors to the college would only be able to seek damages equal to the amount of their contribution.

The court unanimously affirmed the decision of the circuit court to dismiss the case, stating that trust laws cited by plaintiffs do not govern the college.

“Acceptance of the plaintiffs’ position would transform all charitable Virginia nonstock corporations (such as Randolph College) into charitable trusts, and we find no language in (the cited code) that manifests any intent of the General Assembly to make such a drastic change in Virginia’s established law,” the opinion states.

Ellen Agnew, an alumna who has been vocal against the school’s decision to sell art, said the opinion would have a chilling effect on donations made to charitable organizations.

“My alma mater no longer exists. In its place is an institution whose values I no longer recognize,” she said Friday.

College President John Klein said his first year at the college had been a difficult one, but the school now can focus on moving beyond the litigation.

“It really was a relief,” he said Friday. “I think the whole campus is energized — the (Conway) Bell was ringing at 10 o’clock this morning (in

celebration).”

“This college has as its foundation Randolph-Macon Woman’s College. It is a wonderful heritage, and we are going to make sure that we are going to honor that heritage.”

Hooper also is optimistic about the school’s future, she said.

“I hope it will clear up, in the minds of our community as well as those outside our community, uncertainties that existed in terms of our future,” she said. “There’s plenty of hard work ahead, but we’re ready for that.”

Yastremski said she is unsure of the future of Preserve Educational Choice.

The group plans to use its remaining donations toward the trust case to fund scholarships to students at the country’s remaining women’s colleges.

The group may dissolve and simply donate the money to colleges, she said, or it could remain intact to administer the scholarships and advocate for women’s education.

PEC and the college both remain in litigation over the return of a $500,000 bond that was paid to temporarily prevent the sale of the college’s art.