User:QueenCity11/AG page update

__NOINDEX__

Attorney General lawsuit
In 2009, after a two-year investigation by the New Jersey Attorney General, Stevens and the attorney general filed competing lawsuits against one another. The attorney general suit against Stevens, its then-president and chairman of the board of trustees alleged numerous claims involving breach of fiduciary duty and other causes of action primarily relating to financial practices and the financial management of the institute and the compensation and certain loan transactions involving the then-president. The Stevens suit against the attorney general contended that she had overstepped her legal authority over a private institution, and sought that any case be pursued by confidential arbitration.

On January 15, 2010, Stevens announced that the institute and the attorney general's office settled the competing lawsuits. In the settlement, the parties agreed to a number of changes to Stevens' governance procedures, and it appointed a special counsel to oversee the implementation of these changes and prepare periodic reports on Stevens’ progress. Additionally, in a letter to the institute on January 15, 2010, the chairman of the board of trustees, Lawrence T. Babbio Jr., and the then-president Harold J. Raveché announced that Raveché had voluntarily decided not to continue as president beyond June 30, 2010 after 22 years in that position. The settlement made Dr. Raveché a consultant to the institute through October 2011 and forced him to repay the outstanding balance of loans previously made to him by Stevens. It concludes with no admission of liability or unlawful conduct by any party.

The special counsel prepared six reports on the progress of the governance changes outlined in the settlement agreement. The sixth and final quarterly report, dated August 3, 2011, states that Stevens completed on schedule the agreed upon changes to its governance procedures and that “Special Counsel now finds Stevens to be in full compliance with the terms of the Consent Judgment.” In the special counsel's final report from February 2012, he states in his conclusion that he ends his assignment "with confidence in Stevens's future, and with the expectation that the day will come, after an appropriate length of time without incident, for the Consent Judgment to be lifted in recognition of the fact that Stevens is in good hands and no longer in need of the involvement of the court."