November 22, 2008 at 6:13 pm (Journal of Law & Practice)
In May 2008, the Minnesota Supreme Court addressed survivors’ economic loss benefits under the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minnesota Statute Sections 65B.41-71 (2006) (“the Act”).[2] In Perry, the Supreme Court narrowly defined the term “dependent” as used in the act to mean only a spouse or child; precluding a decedent’s live-in girlfriend from recovering survivors’ economic loss benefits under the Act.[3] Read the rest of this entry »
November 18, 2008 at 12:13 pm (Journal of Law & Practice)
Tags: Journal Article, Nonprofit Corporate Law
By: Myron L. Frans & Lucinda E. Jesson
I. Introduction
On April 15, 2008, we published our article, What Qualifies as a Public Charity? Minnesota Enters the National Debate, describing the increased governmental scrutiny of nonprofits and Minnesota’s significant entry into that national discussion. Our article concluded with practical suggestions, particularly for governing boards of the category of nonprofits known as “purely public charities”, as they navigate uncertain waters due to state and national developments.
November 8, 2008 at 7:58 pm (Journal of Law & Practice)
October 23, 2008
Introduction
On April 15, 2008, we published our article, What Qualifies as a Public Charity? Minnesota Enters the National Debate, describing the increased governmental scrutiny of nonprofits and Minnesota’s significant entry into that national discussion.[1] Our article concluded with practical suggestions, particularly for governing boards of the category of nonprofits known as “purely public charities”, as they navigate uncertain waters due to state and national developments.[2] Read the rest of this entry »
November 7, 2008 at 11:00 am (Journal of Law & Practice)
Tags: Journal Article, Nonprofit Corporate Law
The last two years featured seismic shifts in nonprofit corporate law. With two recent cases, Under the Rainbow Child Care Center, Inc. v. County of Goodhue and Afton Historical Society Press v. County of Washington, the Minnesota Supreme Court entered the fray.[1] In this article, we first address the backdrop of federal and state scrutiny of nonprofit structure and governance. Next we examine the Under the Rainbow and Afton Historical Society cases.[2] We then suggest measures Minnesota nonprofits and their attorneys should consider preparing for potential challenges to tax exempt status as a “pure charity.” Finally, we reflect on the potential for broader legislative and regulatory challenges to nonprofit structure and governance given the current scrutiny of nonprofits. Read the rest of this entry »
April 15, 2008 at 12:00 pm (Journal of Law & Practice)
Tags: Journal Article, Negotiating Settlement Agreements
“Lies can save trouble now, but may return in thunder and lightning.”[1]-Mason Cooley
When the Minnesota Supreme Court issued its decision in Hoyt Properties, Inc. v. Production Resource Group, L.L.C. (Hoyt II), 736 N.W.2d 313 (Minn. 2007), many in the legal community were concerned that the court’s decision would unduly constrain settlement negotiations.[2] Much concern was also directed at an attorney’s potential liability for representations made to a client’s adversaries.[3] The court’s decision, however, is not as radical as many initially perceived it to be. All things considered, Hoyt requires no more than telling the truth-and carefully drafting settlement agreements. Read the rest of this entry »
