I was quite amused by the Board of Opinion's legal interpretation of the merger agreement between Penn State and Dickinson School of Law ("Suit over Dickinson step in right direction for board members," Feb.8).

It seemed quite willing to not only shut down the Carlisle campus, but to dissolve the merger all together.

It is quite apparent that none of them have ever gone to law school, or even taken a legal interpretation class, because they focused on the wrong language of the agreement.

The important language is not that which discusses the conditions that must be met in order for Penn State to move the law school. The important language are the words "in perpetuity" which appear in the section that describes the duration of the agreement.

Despite the Collegian's eagerness to dump Dickinson and move on, Penn State merged with Dickinson in perpetuity, which is a big legal word for forever.

The merger agreement did not say that Penn State would merge with Dickinson as long as it was convenient or until we decide to build our own law school at Carlisle and shut Dickinson down. As a Penn State alumnus and current third-year law student, it is my opinion that Penn State should be held to the agreement it willingly signed in 1997 and the Collegian's Board of Opinion should learn a little more about the situation before voicing its opinions on the subject.