An appellate court in Georgia has allowed a residual beneficiary of her mother’s trust to sue a University to recover a $1 million contribution allegedly given by the trustee without authority. It has affirmed a trial court decision refusing to dismiss the claim. (Reinhardt University v. Castleberry, Ct. of App. GA, No. A12A1651, 11/8/12.)
The Tax Court has denied another deduction for the gift of a conservation easement to a charitable land trust. The Court denied the deduction on the ground that the easement was not protected in perpetuity because an existing mortgage was not subordinate to the easement. The Court denied the deduction even though the bank subsequently agreed to a subordination agreement.
Family beneficiaries of the estate of Charles R. Walgreen, Jr. have been unable to convince two Illinois courts that gifts of 10,000 shares of stock in the Walgreen drugstore company designated to two Rotary Foundations in his will and trust were made before he died and should not be made out of shares in his estate. The courts have refused to find a “latent ambiguity” in his estate documents based on the evidence produced in the litigation. (Koulogeorge v. Campbell, App. Cit. IL, First Dist., Fourth Div., No. 1-11-2812, 12/31/12.)
A Los Angeles church has been ordered to pay $62,000 to the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank pursuant to the indemnification clause in the contract under which it obtained food to distribute to needy families. The Foodbank had spent that much in defending itself against a negligence claim bought by a volunteer for the Church who was injured while picking up food at the Foodbank’s warehouse. (New Life in Christ Full Gospel Church v. Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, Ct. of App., CA, Second Dist., Div. 7, No. B232701, 12/27/12.)
A federal District Court in Illinois has allowed a woman volunteer for two nonprofit emergency ambulance services to sue for sexual harassment and discrimination under the employee protection provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The Court has rejected the defense that compensation is required to bring a worker within the employment discrimination protections of the Act. (Volling v. Antioch Rescue Squad, N.D. IL, No.
A veterans' organization that uses telemarketing to raise funds for its programs has no constitutional claim against a public official who says he does not “support” organizations that use telemarking and urges donors to check their fundraising expenses before giving, even where the official singles out the charity as a negative example, the First Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed. (Middleborough Veterans’ Outreach Center v. Provencher, 1st Cir., No. 12-1347, 1/11/13.)
Paul Provencher, the Veterans’ Agent for the Town of Middleborough, MA, wrote letters to several local newspapers, advising area residents to exercise caution before donating to veterans’ charities that use telemarketing or direct solicitation and naming the Middleborough Veterans’ Outreach Center (“MVOC”) and another charity as two who did. The letter urged donors to give to charities that “will use all of your donation to help out the causes that are important to you.”
