A portion of the will of Edward Rose, a benefactor of the Rose Art Museum, expresses his wish for the Rose to remain open as the only public art museum at Brandeis, a relative of the Rose family told the Justice. The part of the will concerning the Rose Art Museum, which Fred Hopengarten, a lawyer related to Edward Rose, read verbatim over the phone to the Justice, states, "Brandeis; has agreed that the Rose Art Museum will be maintained in perpetuity as the only art museum at Brandeis and that Brandeis' permanent collection of works of art by major artists will be housed and exhibited in the Rose Art Museum."

Meryl Rose, a relative of the Rose family and a member of the Rose Art Museum Board of Overseers, said in a phone interview with the Justice that she found out about the will in February. She added that the Rose family had publicized the will in its statement against the administrations' actions towards the museum that was read out on March 16.

Judith Sizer, the University's general counsel, wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that Brandeis was aware of the will and that she believed the University had complied with it.

"None of the conditions set forth in Mr. Rose's will, specifically that the art museum be maintained under their name as the sole art museum on the Brandeis campus and that the museum's permanent collection be kept and exhibited there, is in any way a limitation on the ability of Brandeis to manage the daily operations of the Rose Art Museum within those parameters. Subject to these conditions, Mr. and Mrs. Rose left it to the University to make decisions about the nature, mission, and activities of the Museum," she wrote.

However, Meryl Rose also said that she does not believe the University's actions, despite its expressed intentions to keep the Rose open as a public museum, have been in accordance with the will. "Up until this latest notice that went out, the University was going to turn it into a student art center. When it became apparent that they couldn't do that, now they are trying to turn it into a museum. But, you know, there are certain things inherent to running a museum that they are not doing, the first of which is getting rid of its director," she said. "The administration has not changed what they are planning on doing since the beginning. This is all about selling art, so they are removing the people protective of this collection," Rose said.

Hopengarten explained that the words "Brandeis agrees" imply a contractual relationship rather than a precatory one, meaning that Brandeis is obligated to comply with the will's stipulations. Hopengarten said that it was the understanding of Edward and Bertha Rose that Brandeis had agreed to the terms of the will.

Meryl Rose said the family and Board of Overseers were consulting with lawyers which Hopengarten also confirmed.

"We're talking to lawyers. Quite a few members of the Board of Overseers and the Rose family are lawyers themselves," said Rose.

Hopengarten said that bringing the case to court was complicated. "That is a question that we have to investigate more thoroughly, because the enforcement of trust involves a complex route including the attorney general," he said, adding that "it's not a civil matter that goes right to superior court."

Rose said that the family and the Board of Overseers had not discussed the will with the administration. "We would be happy to talk to them, but we weren't consulted in any step of the way. Obviously their esteem for our expertise is not high," she said.

Jonathan Lee, the chairman of the Rose Board of Overseers, also said that he is fairly certain the will has legal implications but stressed that he could not make legal points since he wasn't an attorney.

Emily La Grassa, the communications director for the Attorney General's office, wrote in an e-mail to the Justice that because she was unable to reach the necessary attorneys by press time, it was unlikely that the attorney general's office would be able to comment at this time.

Meryl Rose explained that she does not believe the University is intending to do any harm, but it would be beneficial for the University to say they made a mistake. "Their announcement made it worse because it is really false. They say they are putting up an exhibit, but who is curating this exhibit? Who is taking care of the fundraising?," she said.

She also said there were other documents concerning Edward and Bertha Rose in addition to Edward Rose's will but that she could not specify further.

Provost Marty Krauss did not respond to a request for an interview.

Meryl Rose said that although she could not confirm anything because she is not a lawyer, the will's potential legal implications were clear to her. "I wonder why the administration all of a sudden sent this letter," she said, referring to the announcement the Provost sent on April 17th announcing the Rose would reopen July 22nd.