A judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Macalester College over its use of animals in psychology courses, although the alumnus who filed the case said Wednesday he plans to appeal the decision.
In a civil complaint filed June 3 in Hennepin County District Court, Dr. Neal Barnard said he relied on Macalester’s “false statements” over its animal testing in his decision to join the college’s Class of 1975 Planning Committee, as well as its Gift Subcommittee, and donate $100 to the St. Paul private school.
The complaint alleged one count each of fraudulent misrepresentation, false statement in advertisement and unlawful practices.
Barnard, a Maryland resident, sought, among other actions, an order compelling the St. Paul school “to cease its use of animal laboratories in psychology instruction and in all other areas for which non-animal methods are available.”
Macalester moved to dismiss Barnard’s claims, arguing that he knew about Macalester’s practices before making his donation.
“Unsatisfied with Macalester’s response to his demands that it change how it teaches psychology,” Macalester attorney Sean Somermeyer wrote in the June 26 motion memo, “(Barnard) set out to cook up a lawsuit by making a $100 donation — his first in 40 years — and claiming ‘fraud.’ ”
A hearing on the motion was held July 30 before Judge Karen Janisch, who ultimately agreed with Macalester and issued an order Tuesday dismissing the three counts.
“The court’s ruling affirms that external parties cannot interfere with or dictate curriculum,” Macalester President Suzanne Rivera said in a Wednesday statement issued by the college. “While people are entitled to personal opinions about animal use in science, the college is deeply committed to academic freedom. We respect the expertise of our faculty in what to teach and how to teach it.”
Barnard is a 1975 Macalester psychology graduate and medical doctor who founded the Washington, D.C.-based Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group that advocates for alternatives to animal testing.
The nonprofit issued a statement Wednesday that said Barnard intends to appeal the judge’s decision.
“Medical schools dropped animal labs from their curricula years ago,” the statement quoted Barnard as saying. “Mac should, too.”
‘Make a Gift’
According to the facts of the case outlined in the judge’s order:
Macalester reached out to Barnard and other 1975 graduates in 2023 about a 50th class reunion, asking for donations for activities and whether they were interested in planning them.
Related Articles
New Trump administration rule bars student loan relief for public workers tied to ‘illegal’ activity
Dakota County elections: Three districts with school boards on the ballot
St. Paul Public Schools using taxpayer funds on special levy. But is it advocacy?
Carnegie libraries, including three in the east metro, will each get $10,000
Voters to decide school levy referendums in Ramsey, Dakota, Washington counties
Before his donation, Barnard reviewed Macalester’s website, which stated that “animal welfare standards and ethical principles are applied at the highest possible level in any animal use or research conducted at or in association with the college.”
The same webpage included a “Make a Gift” link for making charitable donations.
Before making a donation, Barnard contacted Macalester psychology department head Janie Strauss to discuss the college’s current practices.
The two met in person on May 9, 2024, and Strauss, in response to a question from Barnard, informed him that Macalester continued to use “Skinner-inspired animal laboratories” as part of its introductory psychology courses, the judge’s order read.
In the 1920s, psychologist B.F. Skinner invented what would become known as “Skinner boxes,” which often involve starving rats or pigeons to motivate them.
Barnard told Strauss that he believed such practices are prohibited under ethical principles regarding the use of animals in science, called the “Three Rs” — for replacement, reduction and refinement.
“The Three R’s have been enshrined in some federal laws and as part of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, a standard text in the field,” the judge’s order read.
Barnard, believing the college was open to reform, then accepted an invitation to join Macalester’s Class of 1975 Planning Committee and serve on its Gift Subcommittee, the complaint said.
In his role from July 30 through Nov. 1, Barnard made phone calls, sent emails and mailed postal letters to fellow Macalester alumni assigned to him by Macalester’s fundraising staff to solicit charitable donations, according to the complaint.
Barnard met with Macalester President Suzanne Rivera and Macalester Vice Provost Paul Overvoorde on Nov. 6 to discuss his concerns. The next day, Barnard participated in person in another Gift Subcommittee meeting and afterward donated $100 to the school.
Barnard emailed Overvoorde on Nov. 15 about the college’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, which oversees all scientific uses of animals by the college. Rivera then emailed Barnard on Dec. 2, instructing him to direct all future communications on animal use matters to Macalester’s legal counsel.
Judge’s conclusions
Janisch noted in the dismissal order that the only statement the college made to Barnard after the Nov. 6 meeting and his donation the next day was Rivera telling him over the phone that she would “forward [his] concerns to appropriate people.”
Janisch cited 2009 state case law, Valspar Refinish Inc. v. Gaylord Inc., that states: “When a party conducts an independent factual investigation before it enters into a commercial transaction, that party cannot later claim that it reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentation.”
As in Valspar, Janisch concluded, Barnard’s “actual knowledge of Macalester’s practices after investigating the college’s claims, preclude him from establishing he reasonably relied on the content of (the) website statement when making his donation.”
Macalester made no separate promise to Barnard to change any practice, Janisch wrote, and therefore he “cannot, as a matter of law, establish a valid claim for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation consistent with the facts pleaded in the complaint.”
Related Articles
Self-described ‘right wing libertarian’ vandalized Pride flags, anti-Trump signs in St. Paul, charges say
St. Paul man, 65, sentenced for fatally stabbing apartment neighbor, 70, in fight over money
Feds: St. Paul man put $45K hit on Pam Bondi in TikTok post
St. Paul man sentenced for park robbery, downtown shooting that wounded 3
Jonathan Weinhagen resigns from Mounds View school board amid federal fraud allegations
Barnard asserted that he had standing to bring a consumer fraud act violation claim based on the solicitation for donations and his eventual donation. He maintained that his injury and his standing are predicated on his website donation.
Janisch noted the Minnesota Consumer Fraud Act allows private civil action by a consumer who claims injury by a violation in connection with a sale of merchandise for personal, family, household or agricultural purposes.
Janisch concluded that Barnard’s knowledge of the use of animals in classroom settings before donating preclude him “from establishing that he suffered an injury caused by the alleged false statement on Macalester’s website.”
Leave a Reply