Disputing Lawyer’s Claim That Dinky Plaintiffs Follow Instructions of Borough Council Member
To the Editor:
In a recent letter to this paper, Richard S. Goldman, Esq., attorney for Princeton University (“Princeton University’s Lawyer Responds to Roger Martindell’s Letter on Lawsuit,” Mailbox, July 4) wrote that we and other Princetonians have brought a “nuisance lawsuit” against the University. No, we believe the University cannot legally commandeer the Dinky’s public right-of-way in order to build a second driveway to its Lot 7 garage. In 1984, when the University bought the Dinky station, and NJ Transit retained the right-of-way, that garage didn’t even exist.
Mr. Goldman also implied that our lawsuit is “following the instructions of a member of Borough Council.” Here, to mix metaphors, Mr. Goldman is grasping at straw men. A simpler explanation apparently eludes Mr. Goldman. Many Princetonians genuinely deplore Nassau Hall’s high-handed insistence that what’s useful for the University is perfect for Princeton. We plaintiffs don’t follow Borough Council’s secret instructions. Isn’t Borough Council sometimes influenced by constituents’ public statements? That’s how representative democracy works.
Walter Neumann and
Anne Waldron Neumann