“Special Interest” Standing Doctrine To Contest Gifts Abrogated Under UPMIFA

New Hampshire Supreme Court says donor’s estate may not intervene in proceeding to modify use of bequest

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire has held that the traditional rules for “special interest” standing to intervene in a proceeding to change the purpose of a charitable gift are no longer applicable to a completed charitable gift for which a change in purpose is being requested under the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act.  It has denied the executor of an estate the right to intervene in a contest seeking to modify the use of a charitable bequest.

Employer not liable for anonymous racist letters

A Black woman employee fails to state an actionable claim for a hostile work environment resulting from receipt of three anonymous racist letters and other alleged harassment, a federal District Court has held, when the letters were not imputable to the employer.  It has also dismissed the employee’s claims for retaliation and failure to accommodate her post traumatic stress disorder.

Howard University Alumni Lack Standing To Contest Violation of University Bylaws

Court says school is not a charitable trust and amendment of complaint would be futile

When Howard University amended its corporate bylaws during the Covid-19 pandemic, various alumni of the University filed suit to stop the changes.  After 18 months of litigation, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has dismissed the complaint without leave to amend.

Senior center has no obligation to protect member at dance

A nonprofit senior center that provides social events for its members has no obligation to protect a member who is injured when another member fell on her leg during a dance, an appellate court in New York has held.  The Court has reversed a trial court decision and granted summary judgment to the center dismissing the claim.

(c)(3) with over 500 employees not entitled to EAJA fees

A 501(c)(3) nonprofit with more than 500 employees is not entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and expenses from a federal agency under the Equal Access to Justice Act, even though it prevailed in litigation with the agency, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has held.  The EAJA excludes a nonprofit having more than 500 employees from the definition of a “party” entitled to recover fees, it says.