Why Is It Important to Have Diversity on Boards?

When Jane Scaccetti, one of the signors of the Open Letter asking the IRS to require large public charities to disclose the composition of their governing boards, was the only woman on the board of a for-profit business, the board was considering the features it could provide and promote for a 24-hour towing service for stranded motorists.  The men talked about their towing capabilities and the company’s ability to repair the cars towed in.

IRS says NIL collectives are probably not exempt

The Internal Revenue System has issued a Generic Legal Advice Memorandum (a “GLAM”) saying that “NIL Collectives” formed to help collegiate athletes monetize their “name, image and likeness” assets are probably not eligible for charitable exemption because they will in many cases be operating for a substantial non-exempt purpose, serving the private interests of the student-athletes. (AM 2023-004, 6/9/23.)  The GLAM has caused a significant uproar in the college athletics world.

Trustees waited too long to seek change in charitable distributions

Trustees of a charitable trust making distributions to support a public garden and several colleges waited too long to seek a review of a 2003 settlement agreement, approved by a court, that allocated the distributions among the beneficiaries.  The Supreme Court of Alabama has dismissed a petition from the trustees to increase the support of the gardens.

Former exec may pursue breach of non-disparagement agreement

A former executive of a Washington, D.C. private foundation has been permitted to pursue claims against the Foundation for violation of a non-disparagement agreement made as part of a settlement of her claims of discrimination when she was fired.  A divided D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a District Court decision dismissing the claims against the Foundation and a defamation claim against the Foundation’s CEO.

Takeover nonprofit did not discriminate against pregnant employee

A nonprofit behavioral health organization taking over the program of another provider did not discriminate against a pregnant employee when it specifically offered her a position following her maternity leave, even if there was some confusion in negotiating the terms of the position.  An appellate court in New Jersey has affirmed a trial court decision in the case.