The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a District Court decision holding that the directors of a Florida nonprofit corporation have a fiduciary duty only to the corporation and not to the individual members. (See Nonprofit Issues®, Vol. XXXV, No. 1)
A trial court in Manhattan has been called upon to interpret the bylaws of what is purportedly the oldest black Baptist church in the state of New York in order to determine whether the recently elected pastor was validly elected. It has interpreted the Church’s bylaws to include a word that isn’t there.
A federal District Court in Delaware has held that neither a quadriplegic individual nor any of six organizations, apparently all nonprofits supporting rights for the disabled, has standing to challenge the validity of Delaware’s End of Life Options Act (“EOLOA”) that permits physician-assisted suicide of terminally ill patients. The Court has also ruled on a request for a temporary restraining order that the plaintiffs would not be likely to prevail on the merits.
The federal District Court in Texas hearing the challenge to the constitutionality of the so-called “Johnson Amendment” that prohibits charities from participating in election campaigns has denied a request by Americans United for Separation of Church and State to intervene in the case.
A former director’s derivative suit for breach of fiduciary duty against the CEO of a nonprofit corporation has been dismissed by a trial court and appellate court in California on the ground that the plaintiff was not actually a director at the time he filed the suit. The former director claimed that he was still on the board because the deciding vote to oust him was cast by a director who had been automatically dropped from the board by a bylaw terminating anyone who had missed three consecutive meetings.
A federal District Court in Virginia has issued a temporary injunction enjoining the enforcement of constitutionally questionable questions asked by the state Attorney General in an investigation for violation of the state’s charitable solicitation registration law. It has found that the charity is likely to prevail on its claim that demanding donor lists in a Civil Investigative Demand (”CID”) likely violates the right of free association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
