Court Says Racial Slurs Against Black Health Aide Did Not Create Hostile Work Environment
“An objectively reasonable caretaker would not have been detrimentally affected” by patient’s use of N-word “all the time”
A federal District Court in Pennsylvania has dismissed a hostile work environment claim brought against a behavioral health facility by a black woman aide because “an objectively reasonable caretaker would not have been detrimentally affected” by her patient’s regular race-based harassment.
How much does it cost to go to Supreme Court?
How much does it cost in legal fees and costs to take a case to the U.S. Supreme Court?
It is hard to tell exactly, but the Thomas More Law Center, one of the two plaintiffs that took the Schedule B case to the U.S. Supreme Court and won the right to not file its list of donors with the California Attorney General in order to qualify for charitable solicitation rights within the state, has asked for an award of $5,145,434.07. A federal District Court in California has awarded $2,840,603.13.
Court says UPMIFA doesn’t expand standing to sue
The Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act does not expand the scope of standing to allow potential beneficiaries of charitable funds to sue a charity for mismanagement of those funds, an appellate court in Colorado has ruled. It has affirmed a trial court dismissal of a claim by donors to the University of Colorado Foundation that mismanagement had cost the Foundation over $1 billion in unrealized revenue.
Foundation can’t intervene in SEC crypto case
A charitable foundation holding digital assets given to it by the creator of the crypto currency is not entitled to intervene in a case brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission claiming that the issuer failed to file a registration statement under the Securities Act, the First Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed. It is an early case involving crypto assets involving a charity.