In 2002, Robert T. Keeler created a will that left a percentage of his estate to Dartmouth College, his alma mater, for the sole purpose of upgrading and maintaining its golf course. Keeler did not specify a dollar amount, but instead left a percentage of his estate to Dartmouth. He also listed other beneficiaries, including his wife and family, a church, seminary, and medical center, as well as his secretary and housekeeper.
In 2020, Dartmouth closed the Hanover Country Club, which was the golf course that Keeler intended to support with his bequest. The college cited financial concerns for the closure, but Keeler’s estate and foundation believe that Dartmouth actually closed the course to extract more value from the land by building housing and academic buildings on the property. The school’s strategic plan does identify the redevelopment of the course as a possibility.
Keeler’s estate and foundation have requested that Dartmouth return the approximately $3.8 million that remains of Keeler’s bequest, but the college has refused. A legal dispute has ensued, with the Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit also involved. In February 2023, a circuit court judge ruled that Dartmouth could keep the $3.8 million and use it for “golf-related” purposes, such as the study and design of golf practice areas or administrative and equipment costs of the school’s varsity golf teams.
Keeler’s estate and foundation have appealed to the state Supreme Court to reopen the modification request and show why Dartmouth should be forced to return the money. They believe that Dartmouth did not close the golf course for financial reasons, which would meet the legal threshold for repurposing the money, but closed it to pursue other development opportunities. The foundation and estate also argue that the Charitable Trusts Unit failed in its obligation to sufficiently investigate Dartmouth’s financial argument.
The law allows institutions like Dartmouth to modify how they use gifts in limited circumstances, such as if the donor agrees or when the gift’s original purpose or restriction becomes unlawful, impracticable, impossible to achieve, or wasteful. However, the institution must still use the gift in a way that honors the donor’s wishes as much as possible, and a court must agree.
Dartmouth’s legal team argues that Keeler’s bequest did not require the money to be returned to his estate or foundation, and that nothing in the agreement identifies the foundation as a beneficiary. The agreement states that any amounts in excess of what is necessary to upgrade and maintain the golf course shall be distributed to the Robert T. Keeler Foundation, but Dartmouth argues that this language does not require the money to be returned.
The case highlights the limits of donors’ ability to control their charitable intentions, even when they specify restrictions. If Dartmouth is allowed to keep the $3.8 million and repurpose it, it could set a precedent that undermines donors’ trust in charitable giving.
