The Appellate Division has rejected an effort to disqualify two members of Rutgers University’s Board of Governors, including a prominent New Jersey attorney, after they moved out of their home counties.

Heather C. Taylor and William M. Tambussi, a partner with Brown & Connery, were targets of a Middlesex County Superior Court suit aimed at removing them as members of the Rutgers Board of Governors. The suit, Kelley v. Tambussi, alleged that they were disqualified from serving on the board after they moved out of the counties where they lived when they were first appointed. A New Jersey law called the Rutgers Act governs board membership and requires four of its 15 members to be residents of Camden, Essex and Middlesex counties.

In its decision Friday, which was issued as an unpublished per curiam order, the Appellate Division reversed a trial court order removing Taylor and Tambussi from the board after finding that the suit was filed three years beyond the statute of limitations for their removal.

“We acknowledge that the question of whether a Rutgers BOG member can maintain his or her position despite an alleged violation of the Rutgers Act is a question of important public interest. Nevertheless, given the record in this matter, we conclude that the interests of justice do not support enlarging the limitations period," the opinion, issued by Judges Robert J. Gilson, Lisa A. Firko and Lorraine M. Augostini, said.

The lawsuit was filed against the two board members by two Rutgers professors and the union representing the university's faculty, teaching assistants and graduate assistants. Taylor, who has served on the board since 2009, moved out of Middlesex County in 2020. Tambussi was also named in the suit because he left his previous residence in Camden County. The trial court issued an oral order removing both members on June 27, 2024. However, only Taylor appealed because Tambussi’s term was set to end just three days after the order removing him was issued.

The trial court order, issued by Judge Benjamin S. Bucca Jr., lengthened the limitations period because the issue involved a matter of significant public interest. Bucca also found that board members held their positions within the “quo warranto” statute. His third finding was that the residency requirement for board members was continuous and must be maintained for their entire term.

“In other words, the court rejected the concept that those BOG members had to be residents just at the time of their appointment, when they assumed service on the BOG, and when they were reappointed,” the opinion said.

The plaintiffs argued that Taylor and Tambussi violated the Rutgers Act and should be removed under the “quo warranto” statute, which allows for the removal of "any person for usurping, intruding into or unlawfully holding or executing any office or franchise in this state."

In their appeal, Taylor and Rutgers argued that the suit was time-barred because it should have been filed within 45 days of Taylor’s move out of Middlesex County. They further contended that Rutgers BOG members are not officers under the meaning of the quo warranto statute. They also argued that the residency requirement only applies at the time members are appointed.

“We hold that plaintiffs' action was time-barred,” the Appellate Division's opinion said. “We also hold that there are special considerations that mitigate against enlarging the limitations period. In other words, while we recognize that there is a legitimate issue of public importance that plaintiffs seek to raise, there are other considerations concerning the appropriate interpretation of the Rutgers Act that mitigate against enlarging the limitations period in this action.”

The court said that since the plaintiffs filed their complaint as an action in lieu of prerogative writs, it had to be filed within 45 days of accrual. By accepting the plaintiffs' argument, the court said, it would effectively eliminate the statute of limitations required under Rule 4:69-6.

The appeals panel said Taylor should immediately resume her position as a member of the BOG. The case was remanded to the trial court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice.

Counsel to Taylor and Rutgers, Peter G. Verniero and Michael S. Carucci of Sills Cummis & Gross, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The plaintiffs were represented by L. Flavio Komuves of Weissman & Mintz, who did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesperson for Rutgers said the university is "pleased with the appellate court's ruling, which brings Heather Taylor back to the Board of Governors to complete her six-year term that ends on June 30, 2025."

"Her reinstatement comes at a critical time as the board leads the search for a new University president," BOG Chair Amy Towers said in a statement to the Law Journal. "Having served on the board for several years and previously on the Rutgers Board of Trustees, Heather’s experience, qualifications, and deep understanding and commitment to the University will be invaluable to the board and our important work on behalf of the entire Rutgers community.”