Lead Stories

The National Council of Nonprofits, which has been in the forefront of challenging the “pauses” and cutbacks in federal contracts for nonprofit organizations under the Trump Administration, has warned of numerous threats to nonprofits in the Tax Bill being considered by the House of Representatives.  It has urged nonprofits to contact their legislators to oppose new taxes and to support new incentives for charitable giving.

Whether a local land use regulation imposes a substantial burden on the free exercise of religion is a question of law for the court and not a question of fact for a jury, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held.  It has joined the reasoning of the First and Sixth Circuits in determining that the decision-maker under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) is the court and not the jury.

A claims-made insurance policy normally protects the insured organization against claims brought during the term of the policy against the insured company for “wrongful acts” by the insured company and its subsidiaries.

When William N. Ford, Sr., the president of the Sterling Foundation, sought to purchase real estate in New Mexico on which to run an addiction and treatment center, he was rebuffed by Susan Lynn Lavendar Baran, the president of the Ann Wigmore Foundation that owned the land.  As an alternative after several further attempts to buy the property failed, on November 12, 2018, Ford suggested that the two nonprofits merge.  Lavandar (as she was called throughout the ultimate Court opinion) declined that offer as well.

A director of a nonprofit corporation has a fiduciary duty to the corporation but only to the corporation and not to the individual members of the corporation, a federal District Court in New Jersey has ruled.  It has dismissed, without leave to amend, a second amended complaint by a member of the National Association of minor league baseball teams against a member of the board.

In the latest battle in the continuing fight to obtain legal rights for sentient animals, the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that a nonprofit organization seeking to protect the rights of elephants has no standing to sue because the elephants are not “persons” entitled to the habeas corpus protection sought on their behalf.  The Court has unanimously ruled that the state habeas corpus law applies only to human beings.