Durrette disagreed, saying enrollment in a four-year college is “like a lease with an option to renew.” And in this case, he suggested, the terms were being changed midstream.
The second lawsuit, which also was dismissed by the circuit court, centered on whether charitable trust law prohibits the college from spending donations on coeducation.
“Fundamentally, it’s wrong to take assets intended for one purpose and use them for another purpose, charitable or otherwise,” plaintiffs’ attorney William Hurd told the court.
Justice Steven Agee wondered whether Hurd’s argument meant a food bank couldn’t expand its services and offer clothing for the needy. Fuhr said such an outcome would erect “a very serious roadblock to a lot of public good.”
Fuhr also argued that under the law, it would be up to the state attorney general to intervene if donations were being improperly spent.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the cases in June.
Click here to post and read comments
© Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
