Three members of the Rose Art Museum Board of Overseers, including a member of the Rose family and a major donor to the museum, filed a lawsuit against Brandeis University in Massachusetts' supreme court Monday to halt the closure of the Rose Art Museum. Meryl Rose, Jonathan Lee and Lois Foster claimed in the suit that art sales resulting from the closure of the museum "would violate the museum ethical codes ... and Brandeis's commitment to the Roses, the plaintiffs and others that the Rose and its art collection would constitute a permanent, public art museum."

University President Jehuda Reinharz announced on Jan. 26 of this year that the University Board of Trustees had voted unanimously to close the Rose Art Museum and convert the building into "a fine arts teaching center with studio space and an exhibition gallery." Reinharz later stated in an e-mail to the University community that, contrary to his initial statements, the Rose would not close but "will be more fully integrated into the University's central educational mission."

Former Massachusetts attorney general and outside legal counsel for Brandeis Thomas Reilly called the lawsuit "frivolous and without merit," stating that the decision to close the museum is measure to fulfill its "responsibility to provide the very best education and faculty" to its students.


The lawsuit also claims that "Brandeis has greatly accelerated the process of getting works of art ready for sale" in the fall, an allegation that Reilly called "premature" in a statement to the press.

According to University Provost Marty Krauss, "[The University administration and lawyers] are still deliberating what the legal response [to the lawsuit] will be."


In an interview with the Justice, plaintiff and chairman of the Board of Overseers Jonathan Lee said in response to Reilly's comments, "I don't think preserving the cultural heritage of Brandeis is a frivolous matter." Lee continued, "We think that the core values of Brandeis should be about arts, culture, ethics, truth, and this suit is about all of them."

Emily LaGrassa, a spokesperson for the office of the attorney general of Massachusetts, declined to comment on the lawsuit, writing in an e-mail to the Justice, "Our office has received the lawsuit and we are reviewing it at this time."

Prof. Nancy Scott (FA) told the Justice that "things might have been amicably resolved and forestalled, if certain steps had been taken with due care. ... Now the lawsuit will ratchet up further dissent." She also expressed concern about the lawsuit's cost to the University, saying that "given the University's retention of high-profile counsel, ... how can we literally afford this?"

--Andrea Fineman, Brian Fromm, Shana D. Lebowitz and Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.