NFIB SMALL BUSINEES LEGAL CENTER: Form 990, tax year 2010
View the entire original 990 at ProPublica ↗
- Organization
- NFIB SMALL BUSINEES LEGAL CENTER (EIN 62-1570449)
- Tax period
- 2010-01-01 to 2010-12-31
- Filed
- 2011-05-11
- IRS object ID
- 201121319349301882
- Schema version
- 2010v3.2
- Source
- Download XML · Original 990 at ProPublica
Every field in the e-filed return. Faint text is the IRS element name, for citing.
Return header ReturnHeader
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Timestamp | 2011-05-11T13:35:45-04:00 | Timestamp |
| Tax Period End Date | 2010-12-31 | TaxPeriodEndDate |
Preparer Firm PreparerFirm
Preparer Firm Business Name PreparerFirmBusinessName
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | KPMG LLP | BusinessNameLine1 |
Preparer Firm US Address PreparerFirmUSAddress
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | 401 COMMERCE STREET SUITE 1000 | AddressLine1 |
| City | NASHVILLE | City |
| State | TN | State |
| ZIP Code | 37219 | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Return Type | 990 | ReturnType |
| Tax Period Begin Date | 2010-01-01 | TaxPeriodBeginDate |
Filer Filer
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| EIN | 621570449 | EIN |
Name Name
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER | BusinessNameLine1 |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Name Control | NFIB | NameControl |
| Phone | 6158725800 | Phone |
US Address USAddress
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | 53 CENTURY BOULEVARD SUITE 250 | AddressLine1 |
| City | NASHVILLE | City |
| State | TN | State |
| ZIP Code | 372143682 | ZIPCode |
Officer Officer
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Name | JEFF SMITH | Name |
| Title | TREASURER | Title |
| Phone | 6158725800 | Phone |
| Date Signed | 2011-05-11 | DateSigned |
Preparer Preparer
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Phone | 6152441602 | Phone |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Year | 2010 | TaxYear |
| Build TS | 2016-02-24 21:20:13Z | BuildTS |
Form 990 IRS990
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Name Of Principal Officer Person | DONALD A DANNER | NameOfPrincipalOfficerPerson |
Address Principal Officer US AddressPrincipalOfficerUS
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | 1201 F ST NW SUITE 200 | AddressLine1 |
| City | WASHINGTON | City |
| State | DC | State |
| ZIP Code | 20004 | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Gross Receipts | 2159105 | GrossReceipts |
| Group Return For Affiliates | false | GroupReturnForAffiliates |
| Organization501c3 | X | Organization501c3 |
| Web Site | WWW.NFIB.COM/LEGAL | WebSite |
| Type Of Organization Corporation | X | TypeOfOrganizationCorporation |
| Year Formation | 1994 | YearFormation |
| State Legal Domicile | TN | StateLegalDomicile |
| Activity Or Mission Description | THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S MISSION IS TO BE THE VOICE FOR SMALL BUSINESS IN THE NATION'S COURTS AND THE LEGAL RESOURCE FOR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS NATIONWIDE. | ActivityOrMissionDescription |
| Nbr Voting Members Governing Body | 12 | NbrVotingMembersGoverningBody |
| Nbr Independent Voting Members | 11 | NbrIndependentVotingMembers |
| Total Nbr Employees | 4 | TotalNbrEmployees |
| Total Nbr Volunteers | 51 | TotalNbrVolunteers |
| Total Gross UBI | 0 | TotalGrossUBI |
| Net Unrelated Business Txbl Income | 0 | NetUnrelatedBusinessTxblIncome |
| Contributions Grants Prior Year | 986633 | ContributionsGrantsPriorYear |
| Contributions Grants Current Year | 2158440 | ContributionsGrantsCurrentYear |
| Program Service Revenue Prior Year | 0 | ProgramServiceRevenuePriorYear |
| Program Service Revenue CY | 0 | ProgramServiceRevenueCY |
| Investment Income Prior Year | 388 | InvestmentIncomePriorYear |
| Investment Income Current Year | 665 | InvestmentIncomeCurrentYear |
| Other Revenue Prior Year | 0 | OtherRevenuePriorYear |
| Other Revenue Current Year | 0 | OtherRevenueCurrentYear |
| Total Revenue Prior Year | 987021 | TotalRevenuePriorYear |
| Total Revenue Current Year | 2159105 | TotalRevenueCurrentYear |
| Grants And Similar Amnts Prior Year | 0 | GrantsAndSimilarAmntsPriorYear |
| Grants And Similar Amnts CY | 0 | GrantsAndSimilarAmntsCY |
| Benefits Paid To Members Prior Year | 0 | BenefitsPaidToMembersPriorYear |
| Benefits Paid To Members CY | 0 | BenefitsPaidToMembersCY |
| Salaries Etc Prior Year | 525404 | SalariesEtcPriorYear |
| Salaries Etc Current Year | 533426 | SalariesEtcCurrentYear |
| Total Prof Fundrsng Exp Prior Year | 0 | TotalProfFundrsngExpPriorYear |
| Total Prof Fundrsng Exp CY | 0 | TotalProfFundrsngExpCY |
| Total Fundrsng Exp Current Year | 212189 | TotalFundrsngExpCurrentYear |
| Other Expense Prior Year | 442399 | OtherExpensePriorYear |
| Other Expenses Current Year | 1669566 | OtherExpensesCurrentYear |
| Total Expenses Prior Year | 967803 | TotalExpensesPriorYear |
| Total Expenses Current Year | 2202992 | TotalExpensesCurrentYear |
| Revenues Less Expenses Prior Year | 19218 | RevenuesLessExpensesPriorYear |
| Revenues Less Expenses CY | -43887 | RevenuesLessExpensesCY |
| Total Assets BOY | 346872 | TotalAssetsBOY |
| Total Assets EOY | 409551 | TotalAssetsEOY |
| Total Liabilities BOY | 132646 | TotalLiabilitiesBOY |
| Total Liabilities EOY | 239212 | TotalLiabilitiesEOY |
| Net Assets Or Fund Balances BOY | 214226 | NetAssetsOrFundBalancesBOY |
| Net Assets Or Fund Balances EOY | 170339 | NetAssetsOrFundBalancesEOY |
| Info In Schedule O Part III | X | InfoInScheduleOPartIII |
| Mission Description | THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IS A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION CREATED UNDER THE TENNESSEE NONPROFIT CORPORATION ACT. IT IS ORGANIZED EXCLUSIVELY FOR CHARITABLE, EDUCATIONAL, AND SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES AS PERMITTED BY SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED (THE "CODE"), INCLUDING, FOR SUCH PURPOSES, MAKING DISTRIBUTIONS TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT QUALIFY AS EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS UNDER SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE CODE. THE LEGAL CENTER IS A SUPPORTING ORGANZIATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 509(A)(3) OF THE CODE AND IS ORGANIZED AND OPERATED FOR THE BENEFIT OF NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS ("NFIB"), WHICH IS A 501(C)(6) ORGANIZATION. THE LEGAL CENTER IS ORGANIZED TO CARRY ON CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES OF PROVIDING LEGAL EDUCATION AND REPRESENTATION ON ISSUES OF BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST. | MissionDescription |
| Significant New Program Services | false | SignificantNewProgramServices |
| Significant Change | false | SignificantChange |
| Expense | 1963591 | Expense |
| Grants | 0 | Grants |
| Revenue | 0 | Revenue |
| Description | SEE ATTACHMENT 1 FOR SUMMARY OF 2010 CASES | Description |
| Total Program Service Expense | 1963591 | TotalProgramServiceExpense |
| Described In501 C3 | true | DescribedIn501C3 |
| Schedule B Required | true | ScheduleBRequired |
| Political Activities | false | PoliticalActivities |
| Lobbying Activities | false | LobbyingActivities |
| Donor Advised Funds | false | DonorAdvisedFunds |
| Conservation Easements | false | ConservationEasements |
| Collections Of Art | false | CollectionsOfArt |
| Credit Counseling | false | CreditCounseling |
| Term Or Permanent Endowments | false | TermOrPermanentEndowments |
| Report Land Bldg Equip | false | ReportLandBldgEquip |
| Report Invest Oth Securities | false | ReportInvestOthSecurities |
| Report Prog Rel Invest | false | ReportProgRelInvest |
| Report Other Assets | true | ReportOtherAssets |
| Report Other Liabilities | true | ReportOtherLiabilities |
| Report Fin48 Footnote | true | ReportFin48Footnote |
| Independent Audit Financial Stmt | true | IndependentAuditFinancialStmt |
| Consolidated Audit Financial Stmt | true | ConsolidatedAuditFinancialStmt |
| School | false | School |
| Foreign Office | false | ForeignOffice |
| Foreign Activities | false | ForeignActivities |
| More Than5000 K To Organizations | false | MoreThan5000KToOrganizations |
| More Than5000 K To Individuals | false | MoreThan5000KToIndividuals |
| Professional Fundraising | false | ProfessionalFundraising |
| Fundraising Activities | false | FundraisingActivities |
| Gaming | false | Gaming |
| Hospital | false | Hospital |
| Financial Stmt Attached | false | FinancialStmtAttached |
| Grants To Organizations | false | GrantsToOrganizations |
| Grants To Individuals | false | GrantsToIndividuals |
| Schedule J Required | true | ScheduleJRequired |
| Tax Exempt Bonds | false | TaxExemptBonds |
| Excess Benefit Transaction | false | ExcessBenefitTransaction |
| Prior Excess Benefit Transaction | false | PriorExcessBenefitTransaction |
| Loan To Officer Or DQP | false | LoanToOfficerOrDQP |
| Grant To Related Person | false | GrantToRelatedPerson |
| Bsnss Rltnshp With Organization | false | BsnssRltnshpWithOrganization |
| Bsnss Rltnshp Thru Family Member | false | BsnssRltnshpThruFamilyMember |
| Officer Entity With Bsnss Rltnshp | false | OfficerEntityWithBsnssRltnshp |
| Deductible Non Cash Contributions | false | DeductibleNonCashContributions |
| Deductible Contributions Of Art | false | DeductibleContributionsOfArt |
| Terminated | false | Terminated |
| Partial Liquidation | false | PartialLiquidation |
| Disregarded Entity | false | DisregardedEntity |
| Related Entity | true | RelatedEntity |
| Related Org Controlled Entity | true | RelatedOrgControlledEntity |
| Transaction Related Entity | true | TransactionRelatedEntity |
| Transfers To Exempt Non Chrtbl Org | true | TransfersToExemptNonChrtblOrg |
| Activities Conducted Partnership | false | ActivitiesConductedPartnership |
| Schedule O Required | true | ScheduleORequired |
| Number Forms Transmitted With1096 | 14 | NumberFormsTransmittedWith1096 |
| Number W2 G Included | 0 | NumberW2GIncluded |
| Compliance With Backup Witholding | true | ComplianceWithBackupWitholding |
| Number Of Employees | 4 | NumberOfEmployees |
| Employment Tax Returns Filed | true | EmploymentTaxReturnsFiled |
| Unrelated Business Income | false | UnrelatedBusinessIncome |
| Foreign Financial Account | false | ForeignFinancialAccount |
| Prohibited Tax Shelter Trans | false | ProhibitedTaxShelterTrans |
| Taxable Party Notification | false | TaxablePartyNotification |
| Non Deductible Contributions | false | NonDeductibleContributions |
| Quid Pro Quo Contributions | false | QuidProQuoContributions |
| Form8282 Property Disposed Of | false | Form8282PropertyDisposedOf |
| Funds To Pay Premiums | false | FundsToPayPremiums |
| Premiums Paid | false | PremiumsPaid |
| Indoor Tanning Services | false | IndoorTanningServices |
| Info In Schedule O Part VI | X | InfoInScheduleOPartVI |
| Nbr Voting Governing Body Members | 12 | NbrVotingGoverningBodyMembers |
| Number Independent Voting Members | 11 | NumberIndependentVotingMembers |
| Family Or Business Relationship | false | FamilyOrBusinessRelationship |
| Delegation Of Management Duties | false | DelegationOfManagementDuties |
| Changes To Organizing Docs | false | ChangesToOrganizingDocs |
| Material Diversion Or Misuse | false | MaterialDiversionOrMisuse |
| Members Or Stockholders | false | MembersOrStockholders |
| Election Of Board Members | false | ElectionOfBoardMembers |
| Decisions Subject To Approval | false | DecisionsSubjectToApproval |
| Minutes Of Governing Body | true | MinutesOfGoverningBody |
| Minutes Of Committees | true | MinutesOfCommittees |
| Officer Mailing Address | false | OfficerMailingAddress |
| Local Chapters | false | LocalChapters |
| Form990 Provided To Governing Body | false | Form990ProvidedToGoverningBody |
| Conflict Of Interest Policy | true | ConflictOfInterestPolicy |
| Annual Disclosure Covered Persons | true | AnnualDisclosureCoveredPersons |
| Regular Monitoring Enforcement | true | RegularMonitoringEnforcement |
| Whistleblower Policy | true | WhistleblowerPolicy |
| Document Retention Policy | true | DocumentRetentionPolicy |
| Compensation Process CEO | true | CompensationProcessCEO |
| Compensation Process Other | true | CompensationProcessOther |
| Investment In Joint Venture | false | InvestmentInJointVenture |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | AL | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | AK | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | AZ | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | AR | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | CA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | CO | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | CT | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | DC | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | FL | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | GA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | HI | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | IL | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | KS | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | KY | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | ME | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | MD | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | MA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | MI | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | MN | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | MS | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | NH | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | NJ | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | NM | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | NY | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | NC | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | ND | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | OH | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | OK | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | OR | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | PA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | RI | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | SC | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | TN | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | UT | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | VA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | WA | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | WV | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| States Where Copy Of Return Is Filed | WI | StatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFiled |
| Upon Request | X | UponRequest |
The Books Are In Care Of TheBooksAreInCareOf
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Name Person | JEFF SMITH | NamePerson |
| Telephone Number | 6158725800 | TelephoneNumber |
Address US AddressUS
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | AddressLine1 |
| City | NASHVILLE | City |
| State | TN | State |
| ZIP Code | 372143682 | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Info In Schedule O Part VII | X | InfoInScheduleOPartVII |
Form990 Part VII Section A Form990PartVIISectionA (19 entries)
| TitleTitle | Average Hours Per WeekAverageHoursPerWeek | Individual Trustee Or DirectorIndividualTrusteeOrDirector | Reportable Comp From OrganizationReportableCompFromOrganization | Reportable Comp From Related OrgsReportableCompFromRelatedOrgs | Other CompensationOtherCompensation | OfficerOfficer | Key EmployeeKeyEmployee | Highest Compensated EmployeeHighestCompensatedEmployee |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BRADLEY EIFFERT | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 16000 | 203 | |||
| DON COGMAN | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 15695 | 203 | |||
| SUNDER RAMANI | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 16000 | 203 | |||
| TIMOTHY CLAYTON | ||||||||
| CHAIRMAN | 1.0 | X | 0 | 38000 | 203 | |||
| RUTH LOPEZ NOVODOR | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 7500 | 203 | |||
| A JUNE LENNON | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 16000 | 135 | |||
| THOMAS MICHAEL NOBIS | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 8000 | 203 | |||
| MARIA COAKLEY DAVID | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 7500 | 203 | |||
| DAVID M GUERNSEY | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 16000 | 203 | |||
| NEVIN GROCE | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 5500 | 203 | |||
| BETTY NEIGHBORS | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 8000 | 203 | |||
| DONALD A DANNER | ||||||||
| PRESIDENT/CEO | 1.0 | X | 0 | 637883 | 41889 | X | ||
| KURT SUMMERS | ||||||||
| DIRECTOR | 1.0 | X | 0 | 5500 | 203 | |||
| MARY BLASINSKY | ||||||||
| SVP/SECRETARY | 1.0 | 0 | 262005 | 37462 | X | |||
| TAMMY S BOEHMS | ||||||||
| SVP/CFO | 1.0 | 0 | 337022 | 24971 | X | |||
| JEFF SMITH | ||||||||
| TREASURER | 1.0 | 0 | 146138 | 18895 | X | |||
| KAREN R HARNED | ||||||||
| EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR | 40.0 | 181572 | 0 | 18399 | X | |||
| SUSAN M ECKERLY | ||||||||
| SVP | 5.0 | 0 | 281123 | 29427 | X | |||
| BETH MILITO | ||||||||
| EXECUTIVE SENIOR COUNSEL | 40.0 | 156975 | 0 | 6145 | X | |||
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Reportable Comp From Org | 338547 | TotalReportableCompFromOrg |
| Total Reportable Comp Frm Rltd Orgs | 1823866 | TotalReportableCompFrmRltdOrgs |
| Total Other Compensation | 179556 | TotalOtherCompensation |
| Number Individuals GT100 K | 2 | NumberIndividualsGT100K |
| Formers Listed | false | FormersListed |
| Total Comp GT150 K | true | TotalCompGT150K |
| Compensation From Other Sources | false | CompensationFromOtherSources |
Contractor Compensation ContractorCompensation
Name Of Contractor NameOfContractor
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Name Person | BAKER HOSTETLER LLP | NamePerson |
Address Of Contractor AddressOfContractor
Address US AddressUS
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | PO BOX 70189 | AddressLine1 |
| City | CLEVELAND | City |
| State | OH | State |
| ZIP Code | 44190 | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Description Of Services | LEGAL SERVICES | DescriptionOfServices |
| Compensation | 1073242 | Compensation |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Number Of Contractors GT100 K | 1 | NumberOfContractorsGT100K |
| Related Organizations | 282548 | RelatedOrganizations |
| All Other Contributions | 1875892 | AllOtherContributions |
| Total Contributions | 2158440 | TotalContributions |
| Total Program Service Revenue | 0 | TotalProgramServiceRevenue |
Investment Income InvestmentIncome
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 665 | TotalRevenueColumn |
| Exclusion | $665 | ExclusionAmount |
Income From Invest Bond Proceeds IncomeFromInvestBondProceeds
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
Royalties Revenue RoyaltiesRevenue
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
Net Gain Or Loss Investments NetGainOrLossInvestments
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
Net Income From Fundraising Events NetIncomeFromFundraisingEvents
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
Net Income From Gaming NetIncomeFromGaming
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
Net Income Or Loss NetIncomeOrLoss
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 0 | TotalRevenueColumn |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Other Revenue | 0 | TotalOtherRevenue |
Total Revenue TotalRevenue
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Revenue Column | 2159105 | TotalRevenueColumn |
| Related Or Exempt Function Income | 0 | RelatedOrExemptFunctionIncome |
| Unrelated Business Revenue | 0 | UnrelatedBusinessRevenue |
| Exclusion | $665 | ExclusionAmount |
Grants To Domestic Orgs GrantsToDomesticOrgs
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Grants To Domestic Individuals GrantsToDomesticIndividuals
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Foreign Grants ForeignGrants
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Benefits To Members BenefitsToMembers
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Comp Current Officers Directors CompCurrentOfficersDirectors
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 199971 | Total |
| Program Services | 199971 | ProgramServices |
Comp Disqual Persons CompDisqualPersons
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Other Salaries And Wages OtherSalariesAndWages
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 244176 | Total |
| Program Services | 244176 | ProgramServices |
Pension Plan Contributions PensionPlanContributions
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Other Employee Benefits OtherEmployeeBenefits
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 64273 | Total |
| Program Services | 64273 | ProgramServices |
Payroll Taxes PayrollTaxes
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 25006 | Total |
| Program Services | 25006 | ProgramServices |
Fees For Services Management FeesForServicesManagement
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Fees For Services Legal FeesForServicesLegal
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 1367539 | Total |
| Program Services | 1363939 | ProgramServices |
| Fundraising | 3600 | Fundraising |
Fees For Services Accounting FeesForServicesAccounting
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 11584 | Total |
| Management And General | 11584 | ManagementAndGeneral |
Fees For Services Lobbying FeesForServicesLobbying
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Fees For Services Prof Fundraising FeesForServicesProfFundraising
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Fees For Services Invst Mgmnt Fees FeesForServicesInvstMgmntFees
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Fees For Services Other FeesForServicesOther
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 95583 | Total |
| Program Services | 20301 | ProgramServices |
| Fundraising | 75282 | Fundraising |
Advertising Advertising
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 2934 | Total |
| Program Services | 2934 | ProgramServices |
Office Expenses OfficeExpenses
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 171529 | Total |
| Program Services | 26282 | ProgramServices |
| Management And General | 11940 | ManagementAndGeneral |
| Fundraising | 133307 | Fundraising |
Information Technology InformationTechnology
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Royalties Royalties
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Occupancy Occupancy
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Travel Travel
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 19222 | Total |
| Program Services | 15534 | ProgramServices |
| Management And General | 3688 | ManagementAndGeneral |
Travel Entrtnmnt Public Officials TravelEntrtnmntPublicOfficials
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Conferences Meetings ConferencesMeetings
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 1175 | Total |
| Program Services | 1175 | ProgramServices |
Interest Interest
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Payments To Affiliates PaymentsToAffiliates
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Depreciation Depletion DepreciationDepletion
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Insurance Insurance
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 0 | Total |
Total Functional Expenses TotalFunctionalExpenses
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 2202992 | Total |
| Program Services | 1963591 | ProgramServices |
| Management And General | 27212 | ManagementAndGeneral |
| Fundraising | 212189 | Fundraising |
Cash Non Interest Bearing CashNonInterestBearing
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 158360 | BOY |
| EOY | 0 | EOY |
Savings And Temp Cash Investments SavingsAndTempCashInvestments
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| EOY | 204041 | EOY |
Accounts Receivable AccountsReceivable
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 9860 | BOY |
| EOY | 157257 | EOY |
Other Assets Total OtherAssetsTotal
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 178652 | BOY |
| EOY | 48253 | EOY |
Total Assets TotalAssets
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 346872 | BOY |
| EOY | 409551 | EOY |
Accounts Payable Accrued Expenses AccountsPayableAccruedExpenses
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 33950 | BOY |
| EOY | 199051 | EOY |
Other Liabilities OtherLiabilities
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 98696 | BOY |
| EOY | 40161 | EOY |
Total Liabilities TotalLiabilities
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 132646 | BOY |
| EOY | 239212 | EOY |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Follow SFAS117 | X | FollowSFAS117 |
Unrestricted Net Assets UnrestrictedNetAssets
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 214226 | BOY |
| EOY | 155339 | EOY |
Temporarily Restricted Net Assets TemporarilyRestrictedNetAssets
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| EOY | 15000 | EOY |
Total Net Assets Fund Balances TotalNetAssetsFundBalances
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 214226 | BOY |
| EOY | 170339 | EOY |
Total Liab Net Assets Fund Balances TotalLiabNetAssetsFundBalances
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| BOY | 346872 | BOY |
| EOY | 409551 | EOY |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Reconcilation Revenue Expenses | -43887 | ReconcilationRevenueExpenses |
| Info In Schedule O Part XII | X | InfoInScheduleOPartXII |
| Method Of Accounting Accrual | X | MethodOfAccountingAccrual |
| Accountant Compile Or Review | false | AccountantCompileOrReview |
| FS Audited | true | FSAudited |
| Audit Committee | false | AuditCommittee |
| Financial Statement Both | X | FinancialStatementBoth |
| Federal Grant Audit Required | false | FederalGrantAuditRequired |
Schedule A IRS990ScheduleA
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Supporting Organization509a3 | X | SupportingOrganization509a3 |
| Supporting Org509a3 Type1 | X | SupportingOrg509a3Type1 |
| Certification Checkbox | X | CertificationCheckbox |
| Contrib By Controlling Individual | false | ContribByControllingIndividual |
| Contribution By Related Party | false | ContributionByRelatedParty |
| Contrib By35 Controlled Entity | false | ContribBy35ControlledEntity |
Supported Org Information SupportedOrgInformation
Name Name
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | NFIB INC | BusinessNameLine1 |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| EIN | 940707299 | EIN |
| Type Of Organization | 0 | TypeOfOrganization |
| Listed In Governing Doc | true | ListedInGoverningDoc |
| Amount | $0 | Amount |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Number Of Supported Orgs | 1 | TotalNumberOfSupportedOrgs |
| Sum Of Amounts | 0 | SumOfAmounts |
Schedule B IRS990ScheduleB
Contributor Info ContributorInfo
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Contributor Number | RESTRICTED | ContributorNumber |
Contributor Name Business ContributorNameBusiness
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | RESTRICTED | BusinessNameLine1 |
Contributor Address US ContributorAddressUS
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | RESTRICTED | AddressLine1 |
| Address Line2 | RESTRICTED | AddressLine2 |
| City | RESTRICTED | City |
| State | RESTRICTED | State |
| ZIP Code | RESTRICTED | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Aggregate Contributions | RESTRICTED | AggregateContributions |
Schedule D IRS990ScheduleD
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Art Public Exhibition Amts | ArtPublicExhibitionAmts | |
| Held Works Of Art Amts | HeldWorksOfArtAmts | |
| Land | Land | |
| Buildings | Buildings | |
| Leasehold Improvements | LeaseholdImprovements | |
| Equipment | Equipment | |
| Other Land Buildings | OtherLandBuildings |
Other Assets OtherAssets
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Description | DUE FROM AFFILIATES | Description |
| Book Value | 48253 | BookValue |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Book Value Other Assets | 48253 | TotalBookValueOtherAssets |
| Federal Income Tax Liability | 0 | FederalIncomeTaxLiability |
Other Liabilities OtherLiabilities (3 entries)
| DescriptionDescription | AmountAmount |
|---|---|
| DUE TO AFFILIATES | $17,538 |
| PAYROLL TAX LIABILITY | $5,070 |
| VACATION ACCRUAL | $17,553 |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Of Amounts | 40161 | TotalOfAmounts |
| Total Revenue | 2159105 | TotalRevenue |
| Total Expenses | 2202992 | TotalExpenses |
| Excess Or Deficit For Year | -43887 | ExcessOrDeficitForYear |
| Excess Or Deficit Per FS | -43887 | ExcessOrDeficitPerFS |
| Tot Revenue Etc Audited Fincl Stmt | 3794841 | TotRevenueEtcAuditedFinclStmt |
| Donated Srvc And Use Of Facilities | 1635736 | DonatedSrvcAndUseOfFacilities |
| Revenue Not Rptd F990 | 1635736 | RevenueNotRptdF990 |
| Revenue Subtotal | 2159105 | RevenueSubtotal |
| Total Revenue Per Form990 | 2159105 | TotalRevenuePerForm990 |
| Tot Expenses Etc Audited Fincl Stmt | 3838727 | TotExpensesEtcAuditedFinclStmt |
| Donated Services Use Of Facilities | 1635735 | DonatedServicesUseOfFacilities |
| Expenses Not Rptd F990 | 1635735 | ExpensesNotRptdF990 |
| Expenses Subtotal | 2202992 | ExpensesSubtotal |
| Total Expenses Per Form990 | 2202992 | TotalExpensesPerForm990 |
Form990 Schedule D Part XIV Form990ScheduleDPartXIV
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Identifier | FIN 48 (ASC TOPIC 740) FOOTNOTE | Identifier |
| Return Reference | SCHEDULE D, XIV | ReturnReference |
| Explanation | THE LEGAL CENTER IS EXEMPT FROM THE PAYMENT OF INCOME TAXES ON RELATED INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 501(A) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AS AN ENTITY DESCRIBED UNDER 501(C)(3). ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR INCOME TAX. THE LEGAL CENTER IS, HOWEVER, SUBJECT TO FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME. THE LEGAL CENTER DID NOT HAVE ANY MATERIAL UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME TAX LIABILITY FOR THE THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010 AND 2009; NOR DID THE LEGAL CENTER HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS FOR THE TAX YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010 AND 2009. | Explanation |
Schedule J IRS990ScheduleJ
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Severance Payment | false | SeverancePayment |
| Supplemental Nonqual Retire Plan | true | SupplementalNonqualRetirePlan |
| Equity Based Comp Arrangement | false | EquityBasedCompArrangement |
| Comp Based On Revenue Of Filing Org | false | CompBasedOnRevenueOfFilingOrg |
| Comp Based On Revenue Related Orgs | false | CompBasedOnRevenueRelatedOrgs |
| Comp Based Net Earnings Filing Org | false | CompBasedNetEarningsFilingOrg |
| Comp Based Net Earnings Relate Orgs | false | CompBasedNetEarningsRelateOrgs |
| Any Non Fixed Payments | true | AnyNonFixedPayments |
| Initial Contract Exception | false | InitialContractException |
Form990 Schedule J Part II Form990ScheduleJPartII (7 entries)
| Base Compensation Filing OrgBaseCompensationFilingOrg | Comp Based On Related OrgsCompBasedOnRelatedOrgs | Bonus Filing OrgBonusFilingOrg | Bonus Related OrgsBonusRelatedOrgs | Other Compensation Filing OrgOtherCompensationFilingOrg | Other Compensation Related OrgsOtherCompensationRelatedOrgs | Deferred Comp Filing OrgDeferredCompFilingOrg | Deferred Comp Related OrgsDeferredCompRelatedOrgs | Nontaxable Benefits Filing OrgNontaxableBenefitsFilingOrg | Nontaxable Benefits Related OrgsNontaxableBenefitsRelatedOrgs | Total Compensation Filing OrgTotalCompensationFilingOrg | Total Compensation Related OrgsTotalCompensationRelatedOrgs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DONALD A DANNER | |||||||||||
| 0 | 494424 | 0 | 125073 | 0 | 18386 | 0 | 16218 | 0 | 25671 | 0 | 679772 |
| MARY BLASINSKY | |||||||||||
| 0 | 207171 | 0 | 49211 | 0 | 5623 | 0 | 13468 | 0 | 23994 | 0 | 299467 |
| TAMMY S BOEHMS | |||||||||||
| 0 | 269474 | 0 | 64106 | 0 | 3442 | 0 | 10504 | 0 | 14467 | 0 | 361993 |
| KAREN R HARNED | |||||||||||
| 171456 | 0 | 8136 | 0 | 1980 | 0 | 3991 | 0 | 14408 | 0 | 199971 | 0 |
| BETH MILITO | |||||||||||
| 148542 | 0 | 6753 | 0 | 1680 | 0 | 5474 | 0 | 671 | 0 | 163120 | 0 |
| JEFF SMITH | |||||||||||
| 0 | 136250 | 0 | 8538 | 0 | 1350 | 0 | 6818 | 0 | 12077 | 0 | 165033 |
| SUSAN M ECKERLY | |||||||||||
| 0 | 224435 | 0 | 53241 | 0 | 3447 | 0 | 10270 | 0 | 19157 | 0 | 310550 |
Form990 Schedule J Part III Form990ScheduleJPartIII (3 entries)
| IdentifierIdentifier | Return ReferenceReturnReference | ExplanationExplanation |
|---|---|---|
| COMPENSATION ESTABLISHED BY RELATED ORGANIZATION | SCHEDULE J, PART I, LINE 3 | NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER RELIES ON A RELATED ORGANIZATION TO ESTABLISH THE COMPENSATION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, INC. USES ONE OR MORE OF THE METHODS DESCRIBED TO ESTABLISH NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION. |
| SUPPLEMENTAL NONQUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN | SCHEDULE J, LINE 4B | THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, INC. PROVIDES SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLANS (SERPS). THESE NONQUALIFIED PLANS COVER CERTAIN KEY MANAGMENT AND EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL. PARTICIPATION IN ALL SERPS HAS BEEN FROZEN AND FUTURE ACCRUALS FOR THE PLANS HAVE CEASED. NO PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO ANY SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN IN 2010. |
| INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN | SCHEDULE J, LINE 7 | THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE COUNSEL OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER PARTICIPATE IN AN INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN WITH A PORTION OF THE INCENTIVE BASED ON MANAGEMENT'S REVIEW OF THEIR PERFORMANCE DURING THE YEAR. |
Schedule O IRS990ScheduleO
General Explanation GeneralExplanation (18 entries)
| IdentifierIdentifier | Return ReferenceReturnReference | ExplanationExplanation |
|---|---|---|
| VOLUNTEERS | FORM 990, PART I, LINE 6 | In 2010, THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER USED THE SERVICES OF 51 VOLUNTEERS. THE LEGAL CENTER HAS A 14 MEMBER ADVISORY BOARD CONSISTING OF PRO BONO ATTORNEYS ADVISING THE LEGAL CENTER OF WHICH CASES TO GET INVOLVED IN HELPING SMALL BUSINESSES. THE LEGAL CENTER ALSO HAD ONE PRO BONO ATTORNEY WRITE A LEGAL BRIEF FOR THE CENTER. SEVEN ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS ACTED IN PRESENTING WEBINARS TO NFIB MEMBERS REGARDING SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL ISSUES. THE LEGAL CENTER HAD 29 ATTORNEYS VOLUNTEER SERVICES REGARDING HEALTHCARE LITIGATION. |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 | FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4a | 480.00 V. U.S. - EMINENT DOMAIN U.S. SUPREME COURT (CERT PETITION) PETITION TO THE COURT TO HEAR A CASE INVOLVING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S MANIPULATION OF THE RULES CONTROLLING FEDERAL EMINENT DOMAIN PROJECTS, IN ORDER TO ARTIFICIALLY DEPRESS THE COMPENSATION IT MUST PAY FOR PROPERTY IT HAS TAKEN. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF LAND OWNERS ON 11/23/09. ADAMS V. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. - ASBESTOS LITIGATION OHIO SUPREME COURT VICTORY! THE OHIO SUPREME COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER TAKE HOME ASBESTOS EXPOSURE CLAIMS ARE BARRED UNDER THE PREMISES LIABILITY SECTION OF OHIO'S ASBESTOS MEDICAL CRITERIA LAW AND ALSO FAIL UNDER A NEGLIGENCE THEORY BECAUSE NO DUTY IS OWED TO PERSONS EXPOSED OFF-SITE. THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT RULED THAT THE STATUTE BARRED THE CLAIMS. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 09/21/09. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF THE EMPLOYER ON 6/10/10. ADCOCK V. FREIGHTLINER - LABOR CHALLENGE U.S. SUPREME COURT THE FOURTH CIRCUIT'S DECISION TO EXEMPT CERTAIN EMPLOYER CONCESSIONS FROM THE NLRA'S PROHIBITION AGAINST EMPLOYER ASSISTANCE CREATES A MASSIVE HOLE IN THE STATUTE FOR THE THINGS THAT UNIONS VALUE MOST FROM EMPLOYERS. THIS LOOPHOLE ENDANGERS THE INTEGRITY OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, AS UNION OFFICIALS HAVE A STRONG INCENTIVE TO COMPROMISE EMPLOYEE INTERESTS AT THE BARGAINING TABLE AS A QUID PRO QUO FOR ORGANIZING ASSISTANCE FROM THEIR EMPLOYER. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 05/28/09 IN SUPPORT OF CERT PETITION. AMERICAN ELECT. POWER CO. V. CONNECTICUT - CLIMATE CHANGE LITIGATION U.S. SUPREME COURT THE SPECIFIC ISSUE IN THE CASE IS WHETHER THE PUBLIC NUISANCE CLAIMS SEEKING TO SUBJECT AMERICAN BUSINESSES THAT EMIT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TO LIABILITY FOR WEATHER-RELATED EVENTS ALLEGEDLY CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING VIOLATE THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE UNDER ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION. THIS CASE WAS THE FIRST OF FOUR SUCH CASES FILED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. TWO OTHERS ARE ON APPEAL (5TH AND 9TH CIRCUITS) AND THE FOURTH WAS VOLUNTARILY WITHDRAWN. IN ALL FOUR CASES, THE TRIAL COURTS DISMISSED THE CLAIMS AS PRESENTING NONJUSTICIABLE POLITICAL QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY WOULD REQUIRE COURTS TO EFFECTIVELY SET EMISSIONS LEVELS. THE SECOND CIRCUIT, IN FALL 2009, OVERTURNED THE TRIAL COURT'S DECISION IN AEP AND ALLOWED THE CLAIM TO PROCEED UNDER SOME FEDERAL COMMON LAW PUBLIC NUISANCE THEORY. DEFENDANTS ARE FILING A PETITION FOR CERT. IN HOPES THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL OVERTURN THE SECOND CIRCUIT'S RULING. STATUS: SUPREME COURT GRANTED CERTIORARI DEC 2010. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 2/7/11. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 4/19/11. AOI V. AVAKIAN - LABOR LAW VIOLATES EMPLOYERS' FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR OREGON OREGON SB 519 DIRECTLY PROHIBITS EMPLOYERS FROM HOLDING MANDATORY WORKPLACE MEETINGS IN PRIVATE BUSINESSES TO DISCUSS THE EFFECTS OF UNIONIZATION ON THEIR BUSINESS. NFIB ARGUED THAT THIS VIOLATES BUSINESS OWNERS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEAK WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF UNIONIZATION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 4/1/10. COURT GRANTED STATE'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT 5/7/10. ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES OREGON V. AVAKIAN - LABOR SPEECH PROHIBITIONS U.S. DISTRICT COURT NFIB CHALLENGED OREGON'S LAW, SB 519, THAT DIRECTLY PROHIBITS EMPLOYERS FROM HOLDING MANDATORY WORKPLACE MEETINGS IN PRIVATE BUSINESSES TO DISCUSS THE EFFECTS OF UNIONIZATION ON THEIR BUSINESS. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 4/1/10. COURT GRANTED STATE'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT 5/7/10. BAHENA V. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. - INCREASING EXCULPATORY DEFENSES NEVADA SUPREME COURT AFTER THE TRIAL COURT STRUCK ALL OF GOODYEAR'S DEFENSES AND FOUND THE COMPANY LIABLE, IT HELD A JURY TRIAL ON DAMAGES ONLY, WHICH RESULTED IN A $30 MILLION COMPENSATORY DAMAGES VERDICT. THE JURY DID NOT FIND FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES AGAINST GOODYEAR, AS THE COMPANY WAS ABLE TO PUT FORTH SOME EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE DURING THE PUNITIVE DAMAGES PHASE. THE NEVADA SUPREME COURT ISSUED A 6-1 DECISION UPHOLDING THE CIVIL DEATH PENALTY SANCTION UNDER A FAIRLY LOW STANDARD FOR REVIEW, AS THE COURT DID NOT CONSIDER THE STRIKING OF THE DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO BE A "CASE-ENDING" SANCTION. FROM A SMALL BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, IT SUGGESTS THAT IF A BUSINESS MAKES AN ERROR IN FULLY COMPLYING WITH DISCOVERY REQUEST IN A LAWSUIT, IT COULD BE SUBJECT TO THE EQUIVALENT OF A DEFAULT JUDGMENT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. STATUS: DECIDED. COURT UPHELD THE DISTRICT COURT AND THE ABUSE OF DISCRETION STANDARD FOR NON-CASE CONCLUDING DISCOVERY SANCTIONS. BRINKER V. SUPERIOR COURT - EXPANSION OF MANDATORY MEAL AND REST BREAK CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT VOIDING A TRIAL COURT'S 2006 DECISION THAT AN ESTIMATED 59,000 TO 63,000 CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES COULD JOIN A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE DALLAS-BASED COMPANY, THE CALIFORNIA 4TH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL RULED THAT EMPLOYER BRINKER ONLY HAD TO "MAKE AVAILABLE" MEAL AND REST BREAKS TO ITS WORKERS, NOT TO "ENSURE" THE BREAKS WERE TAKEN. THE APPELLATE COURT RULED THAT EMPLOYERS NEED ONLY MAKE MEAL BREAKS AVAILABLE TO EMPLOYEES; IF THE EMPLOYEE FOR SOME REASON DOESN'T WANT TO TAKE IT OR VOLUNTARILY WORKS THROUGH IT, THE EMPLOYER CANNOT BE PENALIZED. THE EMPLOYEES HAVE APPEALED THE DECISION TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 8/19/09. BUSINESS FOR A BETTER NY V. NY DEPT. OF LABOR - URGING REPEAL OF STRICT LIABILITY U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT PLAINTIFFS HAVE CHALLENGED NEW YORK'S INFAMOUS LABOR LAW 240-241, A.K.A. "LADDER LAW" OR "SCAFFOLD LAW", WHICH PROVIDES THAT CONTRACTORS ASSUME TOTAL LIABILITY FOR EMPLOYEE INJURIES REGARDLESS OF FAULT OR WORK CONDITIONS. NEW YORK IS THE ONLY STATE THAT STILL HAS SUCH A LAW ON THE BOOKS; MOST OTHERS HAVE A "COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE" STATUTE, WHICH PARTITIONS LAWSUITS ACCORDING TO BLAME. A BUSINESS ALLIANCE HAS CHALLENGED THE LAW ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS AND ALSO ARGUED THAT FEDERAL OSHA PREEMPTS. STATUS: PENDING. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF BBNY FILED ON 07/31/07. DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED CHALLENGE AND APPEAL FILED IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF BBNY FILED WITH APPELLATE COURT ON 12/21/07. ORAL ARGUMENTS HEARD IN U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ON MAY 21, 2009. CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU V. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER BOARD - LAWFUL REGULATORY FEE OR INVALID TAX? CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT AT ISSUE IS WHETHER THE LEGISLATURE MAY ORDER A STATE AGENCY TO FUND THE BUDGET OF ONE OF ITS DIVISIONS BY "FEES" IMPOSED ON A DISCRETE SUBSET OF PERSONS, EVEN THOUGH MANY OF THE DIVISION'S ACTIVITIES DON'T RELATE TO THEM; FOR EXAMPLE, THE STATE ADMITTED THAT 30 PERCENT OF THE DIVISION'S ACTIVITIES BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY. COURT APPROVAL OF THIS LEGISLATIVE SCHEME WOULD GIVE THE LEGISLATURE FREE REIN TO DO THE SAME FOR A MYRIAD OF OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING FUNDING EVER-LARGER AGENCY BUDGETS ON THE BACKS OF SMALL SEGMENTS OF SOCIETY, SUCH AS BUSINESSES, THROUGH THE IMPOSITION ON THEM OF UNFAIR "FEES." STATUS: DECIDED. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF CA FARM BUREAU ON 08/29/07. ORAL ARGUMENT HELD: DECEMBER 8, 2010. COURT REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. CLEAR CHANNEL V. DALLAS COUNTY - PROPERTY RIGHTS DEFENDED TEXAS SUPREME COURT NFIB IS ASKING THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION'S TAKINGS CLAUSE ALLOWS A GOVERNMENT ENTITY TO NEGOTIATE A DIRECT PURCHASE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY FROM ONE OF SEVERAL PROPERTY OWNERS AND THEN CLAIM THAT, BECAUSE OF THE PURCHASE, THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY IS NOW A PRIVATE PARTY NOT REQUIRED TO COMPENSATE OWNERS OF REMAINING INTERESTS. LETTING THIS RULING STAND WILL ALSO HAVE PARTICULARLY DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESSES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 04/27/09. |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | COLE V. HARVEYLAND - STATE EMPLOYMENT LAW EXEMPTION FOR SMALL BUSINESS WASHINGTON COURT OF APPEALS THE ISSUE IS WHETHER WASHINGTON COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION SUITS AGAINST EMPLOYERS WITH FEWER THAN EIGHT EMPLOYEES. THE WASHINGTON LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION SAYS THAT SMALL EMPLOYERS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE LAW. THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE EXEMPTION OPERATES AS A JURISDICTIONAL BAR. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 11/1/10. COMER V. MURPHY OIL USA - LIABILITY FOR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT MISSISSIPPI RESIDENT NED COMER IS THE LEAD PLAINTIFF IN THIS CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT DEMANDING MAJOR DAMAGE PAYMENTS FROM A HOST OF ENERGY COMPANIES ON THE THEORY THAT THE COMPANIES' CARBON EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTED TO GLOBAL WARMING, WHICH IN TURN SUPPOSEDLY CAUSED A STRENGTHENING OF HURRICANE KATRINA, WHICH DAMAGED THEIR PROPERTIES IN 2005. THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 5/7/10. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED BECAUSE ANOTHER JUDGE RECUSED HIMSELF, DEPRIVING THE EN BANC COURT OF THE QUORUM TO HEAR THE CASE. DOJI, INC. D/B/A DEMOS STEAKHOUSE V. TENNESSEE - UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE TENNESSEE COURT OF APPEALS THE LEGAL CENTER WEIGHED IN BEFORE THE TENNESSEE COURT OF APPEALS IN AN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION DISPUTE INVOLVING AN NFIB MEMBER. THE ISSUE CONCERNS WHETHER AN EMPLOYER DISPUTING AN UNEMPLOYMENT (UI) CLAIM NEEDS TO PRESENT LIVE TESTIMONY FROM CUSTOMERS AND CO-WORKERS TO PROVE THAT A TERMINATION WAS BASED ON MISCONDUCT. PREVIOUSLY, DOCUMENTS LIKE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT CARDS AND EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL RECORDS WERE ADMITTED WITHOUT TESTIMONY. UI HEARINGS ARE GENERALLY VERY INFORMAL, SO REQUIRING EMPLOYERS TO SUBPOENA AND MARCH IN WITNESSES WILL GREATLY INCREASE THE TIME AND MONEY REQUIRED TO FIGHT MERITLESS UI CLAIMS. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 8/4/09. COURT RULED EMPLOYEE'S ACTIONS DID NOT AMOUNT TO MISCONDUCT AND AWARDED UI BENEFITS. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF SUPREME COURT REVIEW. ON 6/16/10, THE TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT DENIED REVIEW. TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT THE TN SUPREME COURT HAS BEEN ASKED TO REVIEW A DECISION BY THE TENNESSEE COURT OF APPEALS IN AN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION DISPUTE INVOLVING AN NFIB MEMBER. THE ISSUE CONCERNS WHETHER AN EMPLOYER DISPUTING AN UNEMPLOYMENT (UI) CLAIM NEEDS TO PRESENT LIVE TESTIMONY FROM CUSTOMERS AND CO-WORKERS TO PROVE THAT A TERMINATION WAS BASED ON MISCONDUCT. PREVIOUSLY, DOCUMENTS LIKE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT CARDS AND EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL RECORDS WERE ADMITTED WITHOUT TESTIMONY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 03/01/10. DOUBLE QUICK, INC. V. LYMAS - DAMAGES CAP SUPPORTED MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT IS CONSIDERING A CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO THE STATE'S $1 MILLION GENERAL CAP ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES. LYMAS SUED DOUBLE QUICK INC. AFTER HE WAS SHOT IN 2007 WHILE LEAVING A STORE IN BELZONI, CLAIMING THE COMPANY DID NOT DO ENOUGH TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF ITS CUSTOMERS. A JURY AWARDED LYMAS DAMAGES OF ABOUT $4 MILLION. THE JUDGE IN THE CASE, HOWEVER, LOWERED THE NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGES TO $1 MILLION, WHICH IS THE CAP PASSED BY THE MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE IN 2004. LYMAS' ATTORNEYS ARE CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE LIMIT. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PROPERTY OWNER ON 12/14/09. ARGUMENT SET FOR 6/8/10. COURT REVERSED AND RENDERED 9-0 ON LYMAS' FAILURE TO PROVE PROXIMATE CAUSE AND DISMISSED THE STATUTORY CAP ISSUE AS MOOT. DRD POOL SERVICES V. FREED MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS VICTORY! THE MARYLAND COURT WILL REVIEW THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE STATE'S GENERAL NONECONOMIC DAMAGES CAP, WHICH CURRENTLY IS SET AT $725,000, THAT APPLIES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES. THE CASE INVOLVES A 5-YEAR OLD WHO DROWNED IN A SWIMMING POOL MADE BY THE DEFENDANT POOL SERVICES COMPANY. THE TRIAL COURT JURY AWARDED EACH OF THE CHILD'S PARENTS MORE THAN $2 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE REDUCED BY THE CAP. THE PLAINTIFFS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE CAP. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ON 1/15/10. COURT RULED ON 09/24/10 THAT THE DAMAGES CAP WAS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL. EEOC V. CRST VAN EXPEDITED - ATTORNEY FEES ASSESSED AGAINST EEOC U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 8TH CIRCUIT THE EEOC FILED A SERIES OF CLAIMS AGAINST TRUCKING COMPANY CRST VAN EXPEDITED, ALLEGING SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF FEMALE EMPLOYEES. THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED THE CASE, FINDING THE EEOC HAD FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND CONSOLIDATE INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS PRIOR TO BRINGING THE TITLE VII LAWSUIT. THE JUDGE DID NOT APPRECIATE THE EEOC'S LITIGATION STRATEGY OF 'SUE FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER' AND ISSUED AN ORDER REQUIRING THE EEOC TO PAY MORE THAN $4.5 MILLION DOLLARS IN COSTS AND ATTORNEYS FEES TO THE TRUCKING COMPANY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ON 9/7/10. EEOC V. KRONOS - EEOC SUBPOENA POWER CHALLENGED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 3RD CIRCUIT VICKY SANDS APPLIED FOR A CASHIER AND BAGGER JOB AT A KROGER'S GROCERY STORE. SHE DIDN'T GET THE JOB AND FILED AN ADA COMPLAINT. THE EEOC ISSUED A BROAD SUBPOENA TO KRONOS, THE PRE-EMPLOYMENT TESTING COMPANY USED BY KROGER, DEMANDING ALL OF KROGER'S TESTING RESULTS FOR EVERY JOB CATEGORY. LATER, THE EEOC ISSUED A SECOND SUBPOENA DEMANDING NATIONWIDE RACE DATA FROM ALL EMPLOYERS KRONOS HAD TEST DATA FOR, PURPORTEDLY AS PART OF AN "EXPANDED" INVESTIGATION UNDER TITLE VII INTO SYSTEMIC, DISCRIMINATORY HIRING PRACTICES BY KROGER AGAINST AFRICAN-AMERICANS. THE TRIAL COURT FOUND THE SUBPOENA TO BE OVERBROAD. THE EEOC IS NOW APPEALING TO THE THIRD CIRCUIT ASKING TO HAVE THE ORIGINAL SUBPOENA ENFORCED. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 12/14/09. COURT RULED IN FAVOR EEOC. EMERALD STEEL FABRICATORS V. BLI - DRUG FREE WORKPLACE DEFENDED OREGON SUPREME COURT VICTORY! THE OREGON COURT IS BEING ASKED TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN EMPLOYER SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE FOR AN UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE WHEN THE EMPLOYER CHOSE NOT TO HIRE A TEMPORARY WORKER AS A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE AFTER THE WORKER DISCLOSED THAT HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PASS A DRUG TEST BECAUSE HE USES MEDICAL MARIJUANA TO TREAT HIS ANXIETY, NAUSEA AND VOMITING PURSUANT TO THE OREGON MEDICAL MARIJUANA ACT. LOWER COURTS HELD IN FAVOR OF THE WORKER AND FOUND THE EMPLOYER LIABLE FOR DISCHARGING THE TEMPORARY WORKER BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY AND FAILING TO REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE A DISABILITY. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 01/07/09. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF THE EMPLOYER ON 05/15/10. GOLDEN GATE RESTAURANT ASSOC. V. SAN FRANCISCO - HEALTH CARE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IS PARTICIPATING IN A COURT CHALLENGE TO OVERTURN SAN FRANCISCO'S WORKER HEALTHCARE SECURITY ORDINANCE. THIS ORDINANCE, PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN JULY OF 2006, REQUIRES EMPLOYERS TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES OR PAY A FINE TO THE CITY. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 03/27/08 IN SUPPORT OF GGRA'S CHALLENGE. ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2008, THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS REJECTED NFIB'S ARGUMENTS AND UPHELD THE SAN FRANCISCO ORDINANCE. GOLDEN GATE RESTAURANT ASSOC. V. SAN FRANCISCO - HEALTH CARE U.S. SUPREME COURT NFIB ASKED THE U.S. SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN A NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION THAT UPHELD SAN FRANCISCO'S WORKER HEALTHCARE SECURITY ORDINANCE. THIS ORDINANCE, PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN JULY OF 2006, REQUIRES EMPLOYERS TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES OR PAY A FINE TO THE CITY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 07/08/09 IN SUPPORT OF GGRA'S CHALLENGE. HESS V. A.I. DUPONT HOSPITAL - MEDICAL MONITORING U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 3RD CIRCUIT VICTORY! THE COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER DELAWARE RECOGNIZES A MEDICAL MONITORING CAUSE OF ACTION. THE CASE INVOLVES A PLAINTIFF WHO HAD A STENT IMPLANTED TO TREAT A CONGENITAL HEART DEFECT; THE STENT HAD NOT RECEIVED FDA PREMARKET APPROVAL AT THE TIME IT WAS IMPLANTED BY DOCTORS AT THE DEFENDANT'S HOSPITAL. THE CIRCUIT COURT WILL DECIDE: (1) WHETHER THE DELAWARE SUPREME COURT WOULD RECOGNIZE A MEDICAL MONITORING CAUSE OF ACTION IF PRESENTED WITH THE RECORD IN THE CASE, (2) WHETHER PLAINTIFF WOULD BE ABLE TO STATE A CLAIM FOR MEDICAL MONITORING IN DELAWARE, AND (3) WHETHER PLAINTIFF MET HIS SUMMARY JUDGMENT BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING A GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT FOR TRIAL REGARDING HIS MEDICAL MONITORING CLAIM. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 03/09/10. COURT RULED IN FAVOR THE DEFENDANT AND DISMISSED PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS. THE COURT REVERSED THE DISTRICT COURT AND HELD THAT THERE WAS NO DUTY TO MEDICALLY MONITOR A MINOR PLAINTIFF AND EVEN IF DELAWARE LAW WOULD ALLOW MEDICAL MONITORING, THE PLAINTIFFS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ELEMENTS NEED FOR MEDICAL MONITORING CLAIM. | |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | INDUSTRIAL COMM'N OF ARIZONA V. MARTIN - WORKERS' COMPENSATION SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA VICTORY! NFIB HAS JOINED THE FIGHT AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING OF FUNDS FROM THE STATE'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION FUND. ON JANUARY 31, 2009 ARIZONA GOVERNOR JAN BREWER SIGNED SB 1001, WHICH SWEEPS OVER $4 MILLION FROM THE STATE'S SPECIAL FUND OF THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, THE FUND ESTABLISHED BY ARIZONA'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION STATUTE TO ENSURE INJURED WORKERS RECEIVE BENEFITS MAINLY IN CASES WHERE THE EMPLOYER IS UNINSURED OR THE INSURANCE CARRIER IS INSOLVENT. THESE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WERE USED TO BALANCE THE STATE'S BUDGET IN VIOLATION OF THE STATE'S CONSTITUTION AND WORKERS' COMPENSATION STATUTE THAT CLEARLY STATE THAT MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL FUND MAY ONLY BE USED TO COVER WORKERS. STATUS: DECIDED. MOTION TO INTERVENE GRANTED 1/5/10. COURT RULED 6/21/10 IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFFS THAT FUNDS WERE HELD IN TRUST. JANKEY V. LEE - ATTORNEY FEE AWARDS IN ADA LAWSUITS CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER CALIFORNIA'S MANDATORY "PREVAILING PARTY" ATTORNEY'S FEE PROVISION REQUIRES A PREVAILING DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM WAS FRIVOLOUS BEFORE AN ATTORNEY'S FEE AWARD CAN BE MADE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT FILED ON 1/7/11. KASTEN V. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE - RETALIATION CLAIMS UNDER WAGE & HOUR LAW U.S. SUPREME COURT THE PLAINTIFF FILED SUIT AGAINST HIS FORMER EMPLOYER UNDER THE FLSA AFTER HE WAS TERMINATED FOR VIOLATING THE EMPLOYER'S TIME-CLOCK-PUNCHING POLICY. THE SUIT ALLEGED THAT HE WAS TERMINATED IN RETALIATION FOR HIS ORAL COMPLAINTS, TO SUPERVISORS AND HUMAN RESOURCES PERSONNEL, THAT THE PLACEMENT OF THE TIME CLOCK WAS ILLEGAL. THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE EMPLOYER, HOLDING THAT, ALTHOUGH INTRA-COMPANY WRITTEN COMPLAINTS COULD FORM THE BASIS FOR A RETALIATION CLAIM, ORAL COMPLAINTS COULD NOT. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT AFFIRMED (585 F.3D 310). WHILE ACKNOWLEDGING A DIVISION OF AUTHORITY ON THE ISSUE, THE COURT OF APPEALS REASONED THAT THE TERM "FILED" IMPLIES A WRITTEN COMPLAINT AND THAT ORAL COMPLAINTS THEREFORE COULD NOT SUPPORT A CAUSE OF ACTION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 08/23/10. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 10/13/10. COURT FOUND IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF ON 3/1/11. KIVALINA V. EXXONMOBIL - LEGAL REFORM/CLIMATE CHANGE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THE SUIT SEEKS MONETARY DAMAGES FROM VARIOUS ENERGY COMPANIES FOR THE ALLEGED DESTRUCTION OF KIVALINA, ALASKA BY CLIMATE CHANGE. THE SPECIFIC ISSUE IN THE CASE IS WHETHER THE PUBLIC NUISANCE CLAIMS SEEKING TO SUBJECT AMERICAN BUSINESS THAT EMIT CO2, METHANE AND OTHER SUCH GASSES TO LIABILITY FOR WEATHER-RELATED EVENTS ALLEGEDLY CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING VIOLATE THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE UNDER ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION. THE SUIT WAS DISMISSED BY THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 07/07/10. KLOTZ V. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER - MALPRACTICE AND LEGAL REFORM MISSOURI SUPREME COURT A JURY AWARDED $2.58 MILLION, INCLUDING $1 MILLION IN NONECONOMIC DAMAGES, IN A MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTION AGAINST A PRESIDING PHYSICIAN AND HOSPITAL FOR PLAINTIFFS CONTRACTION OF A STAPH INFECTION WHICH RESULTED IN MULTIPLE AMPUTATIONS. THE CIRCUIT COURT INITIALLY RULED THAT THE 2005 STATUTE, WHICH PLACED A NEW NONECONOMIC DAMAGES CAP AT $350,000 FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ACTIONS, WAS CONSTITUTIONAL AND APPLIED TO THOSE DEFENDANTS WHO WERE INCLUDED IN THE CAUSE OF ACTION AFTER THE LAW TOOK EFFECT. THE CASE WAS APPEALED TO THE EASTERN DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS, WHICH TRANSFERRED IT TO THE MISSOURI SUPREME COURT TO DETERMINE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CAP. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 11/4/09. COURT RULED DAMAGE CAP DID NOT APPLY IN THIS MATTER. LAMONS GASKET CO. V. SWIU - NLRB OPENS DOOR TO MORE STEALTH CARD CHECK AGREEMENTS NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD IN A 3-2 DECISION ON AUGUST 27, THE BOARD VOTED TO REVIEW A LANDMARK 2007 CASE, DANA CORPORATION, IN WHICH IT GRANTED DISSENTING WORKERS THE RIGHT TO UNDO A SUCCESSFUL (I.E., EMPLOYER-RECOGNIZED) UNION CARD CHECK CAMPAIGN AND DEMAND A SECRET BALLOT ELECTION. PRIOR TO THIS DECISION, EMPLOYEES HAD NO WAY TO DEMAND AN ELECTION IF THE EMPLOYER AGREED TO RECOGNIZE A UNION BASED ON AUTHORIZATION CARDS. WORKERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY USED ELECTIONS TO KICK OUT UNWANTED UNIONS, DEMONSTRATING THE UNRELIABILITY OF CARD CHECK INSTANT ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS. WORKERS FREQUENTLY SIGN UNION AUTHORIZATION CARDS DUE TO UNION ORGANIZERS' INTIMIDATING TACTICS OR EVEN OUTRIGHT LIES ABOUT WHAT SIGNING A CARD MEANS. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB FILED TWO AMICUS BRIEFS ON 11/1/10 IN SUPPORT OF PRESERVING DANA CORPORATION. LEWIS V. CITY OF CHICAGO - LIMITATIONS FOR TITLE VII DISPARATE IMPACT CLAIMS U.S. SUPREME COURT WHETHER THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON A DISPARATE IMPACT CLAIM BEGINS WHEN AN EMPLOYER ANNOUNCES A PRACTICE THAT MAY VIOLATE TITLE VII OR WHEN IT BEINGS PUTS THE PRACTICE INTO EFFECT. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT HELD THAT 300 DAY PERIOD FOR FILING A CLAIM WITH THE EEOC BEGINS ON THE DATE THE PRACTICE IS ANNOUNCED. STATUS: DECIDED. THE COURT REVERSED AND REMANDED THE CASE. THE COURT HELD THAT THE GROUP OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN WOULD-BE FIREFIGHTERS HAD FILED A TIMELY CHARGE OF RACE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE CITY OF CHICAGO. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF CITY ON 1/22/10. ORAL ARGUMENT HELD 2/22/10. LOAR V. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES - FORCED UNIONIZATION MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT NFIB HAS SUPPORTED HOME-BASED DAY CARE PROVIDERS WHO ARE PROTESTING AN EFFORT BY THE STATE OF MICHIGAN TO UNILATERALLY UNIONIZE DAY CARE PROVIDERS WHO PROVIDE CARE TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES RECEIVING STATE SUBSIDIES. AS PART OF THIS UNION, THE PROVIDERS HAD DUES WITHHELD FROM STATE SUBSIDY PAYMENTS PROVIDED TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN APRIL 2010. ON SEPT. 16, 2010, THE SUPREME COURT ORDERED THE APPELLATE COURT TO EXPLAIN ITS SIX-WORD ORDER DISMISSING THE CASE. ON SEPT. 23, 2010, COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMED DISMISSAL EXPLAINING THAT PROVIDERS ARE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. LOCKE V. KARASS - NONMEMBER UNION FEES U.S. SUPREME COURT IN LOCKE, THE COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER A NATIONAL UNION THAT FUNCTIONS AS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT FOR CERTAIN STATE EMPLOYEES CAN CHARGE LOCAL NONMEMBERS FOR LITIGATION EXPENSES, EVEN WHERE THE LITIGATION DOES NOT AFFECT THE LOCAL UNION. THE COURT HAS PREVIOUSLY HELD THAT UNIONS CAN CHARGE NONMEMBERS A SERVICE FEE TO COVER EXPENSES RELATED TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION, BUT CANNOT CHARGE NONMEMBERS TO SUPPORT POLITICAL OR IDEOLOGICAL EXPRESSION. STATUS: DECIDED. COURT RULED THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES A LOCAL UNION MAY CHARGE A NONMEMBER AN APPROPRIATE SHARE OF ITS CONTRIBUTION TO A NATIONAL UNION'S LITIGATION EXPENSES. LOCKE V. SHORE - REGULATORY RESTRICTION ON INTERIOR DESIGNER U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT NFIB JOINED A LAWSUIT THAT CHALLENGED A FLORIDA LAW THAT PROHIBITS PEOPLE FROM PRACTICING INTERIOR DESIGN UNLESS THEY FIRST GET THE GOVERNMENT'S PERMISSION. THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THEY SPEND SIX YEARS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS JUMPING THROUGH THE ARBITRARY HOOPS OF FLORIDA'S INTERIOR DESIGN LICENSING LAW. IN MARCH 2011, THE APPELLATE COURT UPHELD A DISTRICT COURT RULING THAT FOUND THE REGULATION CONSTITUTIONAL. THE RULING COMES DESPITE ADMISSIONS BY THE STATE THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF INTERIOR DESIGN POSES ANY THREAT TO THE PUBLIC. STATUS: DECIDED. COURT UPHELD THE REGULATION ON 3/2/11. AN APPEAL TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IS PLANNED. | |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | LOCKSHIN V. SEMSKER - UPHOLDING MARYLAND'S DAMAGES CAP COURT OF APPEALS THIS CASE CONCERNS THE DEATH OF 47-YEAR-OLD ATTORNEY RICHARD SEMSKER WHO DIED FROM MALIGNANT MELANOMA. THE FAMILY OF SEMSKER FILED A MALPRACTICE CLAIM AGAINST SEMSKER'S DERMATOLOGIST FOR FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE CANCER, AND A JURY AWARDED $3 MILLION IN NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGES. FOLLOWING TRIAL, THE TRIAL JUDGE FOUND THAT THE NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGES CAP DID NOT APPLY TO THIS CASE BECAUSE THE PARTIES HAD NOT GONE THROUGH PRE-SUIT ARBITRATION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 8/26/09. LUNSFORD V. SABERHAGEN HOLDINGS, INC. - STRICT LIABILITY OF SUCCESSIVE ASBESTOS MANUFACTURERS WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT (PETITION FOR REVIEW) THIS CASE CONCERNS WHETHER WASHINGTON STATE CASES ADOPTING STRICT LIABILITY CAN BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY. THE WASHINGTON COURT OF APPEALS IN LUNSFORD HELD THAT STRICT LIABILITY APPLIED RETROACTIVELY TO PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM OF ASBESTOS-RELATED MESOTHELIOMA FROM HOUSEHOLD EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS MANY YEARS BEFORE STRICT LIABILITY WAS RECOGNIZED IN WASHINGTON. IN REACHING ITS DECISION, THE APPELLATE COURT REFUSED TO APPLY THE THREE-PART TEST SET FORTH BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN CHEVRON OIL FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A NEW RULE, SUCH AS THE ADOPTION OF STRICT LIABILITY, SHOULD APPLY RETROACTIVELY. INSTEAD, THE APPELLATE COURT SAID THAT PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF STRICT LIABILITY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO SABERHAGEN. THE COURT BOLDLY CONCLUDED THAT CHEVRON OIL AND RECENT WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT CASES APPLYING THE CHEVRON OIL TEST WERE ERRONEOUS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF CERT PETITION ON 11/20/07. COURT GRANTED REVIEW AND AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON MERITS ON 06/06/08. MCDONALD V. CITY HOSPITAL - CHALLENGE TO WEST VIRGINIA'S PUNITIVE DAMAGES CAP WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS NFIB JOINED A COALITION AMICUS BRIEF IN A CHALLENGE TO THE STATE'S CAP ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES FOR MEDICAL LIABILITY ACTIONS. STATUS: PENDING. MERRILL V. OHIO - PROPERTY RIGHTS OHIO SUPREME COURT THE CASE INVOLVES A CHALLENGE TO SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNERS' RIGHT TO EXCLUDE TRESPASSERS ON DRY BEACHES ABOVE THE WATER'S EDGE. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE NOT ONLY FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT FOR BUSINESSES ALONG LAKE ERIK WHO WANT TO BE ABLE TO EXCLUDE TRESPASSERS. THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURTS FOUND LARGELY IN FAVOR OF THE LANDOWNERS. THE OHIO DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES HAS NOW APPEALED TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 9/20/10. ORAL ARGUMENT HELD 2/1/11. METROPOLITAN MILWAUKEE ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCE V. CITY OF MILWAUKEE - MANDATED SICK LEAVE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MILWAUKEE COUNTY ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008, MILWAUKEE BECAME THE THIRD CITY IN THE UNITED STATES, AFTER SAN FRANCISCO AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO REQUIRE THAT ALL CITY BUSINESSES PROVIDE THEIR EMPLOYEES WITH PAID SICK LEAVE THROUGH THE PASSAGE OF A BINDING REFERENDUM. THE BINDING REFERENDUM PROVIDES THAT ALL PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES EMPLOYED WITHIN THE CITY WILL ACCRUE NINE PAID SICK DAYS PER YEAR. NFIB ARGUED THAT THE MEASURE INTERFERES WITH EMPLOYERS' RIGHTS TO NEGOTIATE MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL LABOR AGREEMENTS WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES AND IS AN ILLEGAL EXTENSION OF THE MILWAUKEE'S AUTHORITY INTO AREAS OF LAW RESERVED TO THE STATE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 01/28/09. MUNSON V. DEL TACO - PROTECTING SMALL BIZ FROM UNSCRUPULOUS ADA LAWSUITS CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT NFIB IS URGING THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS TO FIND THAT DISCRIMINATORY INTENT IS REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR DEFENDANTS TO BE LIABLE FOR MONETARY DAMAGES FOR VIOLATIONS UNDER CALIFORNIA'S UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, WHICH INCORPORATES INTO THE STATE LAW THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA). STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEL TACO ON 12/11/08. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR MAY 6, 2009. ON JUNE 11, 2009, THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT ANSWERED A CERTIFIED QUESTION FROM THE 9TH CIRCUIT: UNDER THE UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, DEFENDANTS CAN BE LIABLE FOR MONETARY DAMAGES FOR UNINTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION THROUGH ADA VIOLATIONS. NURSING CARE MANAGEMENT OF AMERICA, INC. V. OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS COMM'N - PREGNANCY LEAVE OHIO SUPREME COURT VICTORY! TIFFANY MCFEE'S EMPLOYMENT WAS TERMINATED BY NURSING CARE MANAGEMENT OF AMERICA, D/B/A PATASKALA OAKS, WHEN SHE PRESENTED HER EMPLOYER A PHYSICIAN'S NOTE STATING THAT SHE WAS UNABLE TO WORK DUE TO A PREGNANCY-RELATED MEDICAL CONDITION. BECAUSE SHE HAD BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE COMPANY FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR, MCFEE DID NOT QUALIFY FOR LEAVE UNDER THE COMPANY'S LEAVE POLICY. THE OCRC FOUND PATASKALA OAKS VIOLATED OHIO'S ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW. THE ALJ WHO HEARD THE COMPLAINT RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE DISMISSED. HOWEVER, THE OCRC REJECTED THE ALJ'S POSITION AND HELD THAT THE TERMINATION OF MCFEE'S EMPLOYMENT DUE TO HER NEED FOR MATERNITY LEAVE VIOLATED OHIO'S LAWS AGAINST PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION. THE COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT REVERSED THE COMMISSION. THE CASE WAS THEN APPEALED TO THE FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, WHICH FOUND THAT MCFEE HAD PRESENTED DIRECT EVIDENCE OF PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION AND UPHELD THE COMMISSION'S DECISION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 9/28/09 AND REPLY AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 12/22/09. ARGUMENT SET FOR 1/13/10. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF THE EMPLOYER ON 6/22/10. OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS COMM'N V. NURSING CARE MANAGEMENT - MATERNITY LEAVE OHIO SUPREME COURT TIFFANY MCFEE'S EMPLOYMENT WAS TERMINATED BY NURSING CARE MANAGEMENT OF AMERICA, D/B/A PATASKALA OAKS, WHEN SHE PRESENTED HER EMPLOYER A PHYSICIAN'S NOTE STATING THAT SHE WAS UNABLE TO WORK DUE TO A PREGNANCY-RELATED MEDICAL CONDITION. BECAUSE SHE HAD BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE COMPANY FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR (EIGHT MONTHS), MCFEE DID NOT QUALIFY FOR LEAVE UNDER THE COMPANY'S LEAVE POLICY. THE FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT FOUND THAT MCFEE HAD PRESENTED DIRECT EVIDENCE OF PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION AND UPHELD THE COMMISSION'S DECISION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 09/25/09. O'NEIL V. CRANE - ASBESTOS REFORM CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT THE ISSUE OF WHETHER A DEFENDANT SUCH AS A PUMP AND VALVE MAKER CAN BE HELD LIABLE FOR ASBESTOS PRODUCTS MADE BY ANOTHER COMPANY AND AFFIXED POST-SALE SUCH AS BY THE NAVY IS FREQUENTLY LITIGATED. THE FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT CHOSE TO FOLLOW WASHINGTON STATE, HOLDING THAT MANUFACTURERS ARE RESPONSIBLE ONLY FOR THEIR OWN PRODUCTS. THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE APPEALED. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS LETTER BRIEF FILED 11/12/09. COURT GRANTED CERT PETITION 12/24/09. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 2/22/10. PANAG V. CREDIT CONTROL SERVICES, INC. - EXPANSION OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT THIS CASE CONCERNS WHETHER THE WASHINGTON CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (CPA) APPLIES TO A COLLECTION AGENCY'S ATTEMPTS TO COLLECT ON AN INSURANCE COMPANY'S SUBROGATION CLAIM AGAINST UNINSURED MOTORISTS. THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON REJECTED CCS'S ARGUMENT THAT THE CPA APPLIES ONLY TO CONSUMER-ORIENTED RELATIONSHIPS. AS A RESULT OF THIS DECISION, NEARLY ANY BUSINESS MAY BE SUBJECT TO THE CPA FOR ANY DISPUTE IT MAY ENTER INTO, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT DISPUTE INVOLVES A CUSTOMER, A CONTRACT, OR ANY OTHER BUSINESS-LIKE RELATIONSHIP. NFIB FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 04/29/09. PLENCO V. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. - CHALLENGING INSURER'S LIMITS ON ASBESTOS COVERAGE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE WHAT TYPES OF RESTRICTIONS AN INSURANCE COMPANY CAN PLACE ON ITS DUTY TO DEFEND AND INDEMNIFY AN INSURED IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION. PLENCO, A FAMILY-OWNED PLASTICS COMPANY LOCATED IN SHEBOYGAN, WI, HAS BEEN NAMED AS A DEFENDANT IN HUNDREDS OF ASBESTOS LAWSUITS OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS FOR ALLEGED EXPOSURE TO PLENCO PRODUCTS THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN 1950 AND 1983. FROM 1968 THROUGH 1989, PLENCO WAS INSURED (GENERAL LIABILITY AND UMBRELLA) WITH LIBERTY MUTUAL. UNTIL 2004, LIBERTY MUTUAL DUTIFULLY RESPONDED TO ALL LAWSUITS FILED AGAINST PLENCO. IN 2004, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSTITUTED A NEW COVERAGE POLICY THAT DRASTICALLY REDUCED PLENCO'S COVERAGE FROM OVER $70 MILLION (THE ENTIRE INSURED PERIOD) TO ABOUT $10 MILLION. PLENCO CHALLENGED LIBERTY MUTUAL'S NEW POLICY IN FEDERAL COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PLENCO ON 06/24/08. ON JANUARY 29, 2009, THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT DECIDED A CERTIFIED QUESTION FROM THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT HELD THAT EACH CLAIMANT'S EXPOSURE WAS ONE OCCURRENCE, WISC. STAT. 631.43(1) DOES NOT APPLY TO SUCCESSIVE INSURANCE POLICIES, AND LIBERTY MUTUAL MUST DEFEND AND PAY UP TO THE POLICY LIMITS. | |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | PRICELINE V. CITY OF ANAHEIM - PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL REFORM CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT MANY ONLINE TRAVEL SERVICES FORM PARTNERSHIPS WITH HOTELS SO THAT CONSUMERS CAN BUY BOTH DISCOUNTED PLANE TICKETS AND MAKE HOTEL RESERVATIONS IN A SINGLE TRANSACTION. BECAUSE THE ONLINE TRAVEL SERVICES BRING IN CUSTOMERS THAT THE HOTEL CHAINS MIGHT NOT ATTRACT, THE ONLINE TRAVEL SERVICES COMMONLY CHARGE THE HOTEL A SERVICE FEE. SOME PLAINTIFFS' ATTORNEYS APPROACHED THE CALIFORNIA STATE GOVERNMENTS AND NOTED THAT CALIFORNIA COULD TRY TO COLLECT HOTEL AND OCCUPANCY TAXES ON THE SERVICE FEES. THE PLAINTIFFS' ATTORNEYS VOLUNTEERED TO SUE THE ONLINE COMPANIES IN EXCHANGE FOR A PERCENTAGE OF THE RECOVERED TAX. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PRICELINE ON JUNE 24, 2009. COURT UPHELD COUNSEL RETENTION AGREEMENT JAN.5, 2010. RITE AID - NLRB OPENS DOOR TO MORE STEALTH CARD CHECK AGREEMENTS THE OBAMA NLRB HAS COMMENCED THE PROCESS THAT WILL LIKELY LEAD TO THE REVERSAL OF A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT PRECEDENTS FOR WORKERS. IN A 3-2 DECISION ON AUGUST 27, THE BOARD VOTED TO REVIEW A LANDMARK 2007 CASE, DANA CORPORATION, IN WHICH IT GRANTED DISSENTING WORKERS THE RIGHT TO UNDO A SUCCESSFUL (I.E., EMPLOYER-RECOGNIZED) UNION CARD CHECK CAMPAIGN AND DEMAND A SECRET BALLOT ELECTION. PRIOR TO THIS DECISION, EMPLOYEES HAD NO WAY TO DEMAND AN ELECTION IF THE EMPLOYER AGREED TO RECOGNIZE A UNION BASED ON AUTHORIZATION CARDS. WORKERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY USED ELECTIONS TO KICK OUT UNWANTED UNIONS, DEMONSTRATING THE UNRELIABILITY OF CARD CHECK INSTANT ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS. WORKERS FREQUENTLY SIGN UNION AUTHORIZATION CARDS DUE TO UNION ORGANIZERS' INTIMIDATING TACTICS OR EVEN OUTRIGHT LIES ABOUT WHAT SIGNING A CARD MEANS. IN VOTING TO REVISIT THE DANA CASE, THE OBAMA NLRB HAS SIGNALED ITS INTENT TO DENY WORKERS THE ABILITY TO VOTE ACCORDING TO THEIR CONSCIENCE AND REMOVE AN UNWANTED UNION FROM THEIR WORKPLACE. NFIB HAS FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF WITH THE BOARD, URGING IT NOT TO REVOKE THE NEW PROTECTIONS ACCORDED TO WORKERS SWEPT INTO UNION RANKS THROUGH CARD CHECK FORCED UNIONISM. THE BOARD MUST RETURN TO ITS ORIGINAL INTENT OF PROTECTING WORKERS' BASIC FREEDOMS RATHER THAN INFRINGING UPON THEM. ROBINSON V. CROWN CORK & SEAL CO. - LIMITING ASBESTOS LITIGATION TEXAS SUPREME COURT THIS APPEAL INVOLVES A CHALLENGE TO THE RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF A TEXAS LAW LIMITING SUCCESSOR ASBESTOS-RELATED LIABILITIES FOR INNOCENT DEFENDANTS, SUCH AS CROWN CORK & SEAL (THE RESPONDENT IN THE CASE). THE DECISION IS ALSO LIKELY TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE RETROACTIVE ASBESTOS AND SILICA MEDICAL CRITERIA LAW ENACTED IN 2005. A DECISION OVERTURNING THAT LAW COULD SEND POTENTIALLY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF CLAIMS BACK INTO THE TEXAS COURTS. STATUS: DECIDED. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED 08/02/07. ORAL ARGUMENTS HEARD 02/07/08. COURT RULED IN OCTOBER 2010 THAT THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS A LAW SHIELDING CROWN CORK FROM SUCCESSOR LIABILITY IN PENDING CASES. ROUNDY'S - MEANING OF "DISCRIMINATION" IN NONEMPLOYEE ACCESS CASES NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD THE NLRB SOLICITED AMICUS BRIEFS TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE PROPER DEFINITION OF "DISCRIMINATION" IN CASES WHERE EMPLOYERS DENY NONEMPLOYEE UNION ORGANIZERS ACCESS TO THE EMPLOYER'S PROPERTY. THE NLRB'S INTERPRETATION OF THE CURRENT RULE FORCES BUSINESS OWNERS TO PERMIT UNION ORGANIZERS TO CONDUCT A BOYCOTT ON THE BUSINESS' PRIVATE PROPERTY. NFIB ARGUED THAT IT IS WRONG TO REQUIRE A BUSINESS OWNER TO ALLOW UNION ORGANIZERS ONTO THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARMING THE BUSINESS. SINCE BOYCOTTS ARE ESPECIALLY DEVASTATING TO SMALL BUSINESSES, THE BOARD'S CURRENT INTERPRETATION IMPERMISSIBLY INTRUDES ON BUSINESS OWNERS PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. INSTEAD, NFIB ARGUED THAT THE BOARD SHOULD ADOPT A RULE THAT ONLY FINDS IT UNLAWFUL TO EXCLUDE UNIONS FROM THEIR PROPERTY IF THE BUSINESS ALLOWS OTHER GROUPS TO DO THE SAME ACTIVITY AS THE UNION. UNDER THIS MORE COMMONSENSE DEFINITION, A BUSINESS COULD RIGHTFULLY ALLOW CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS LIKE THOSE MADE BY THE RED CROSS, BUT PROHIBIT NON-CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS LIKE THOSE OF AVON OR UNION ORGANIZATION. STATUS: FILED AMICUS BRIEF ON 1/7/11. SACKETT V. EPA - REGULATORY TAKING U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION THE CASE CONCERNS A CLEAN WATER ACT VIOLATION THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ISSUED TO THE SACKETTS, LANDOWNERS IN IDAHO. EPA CLAIMS THE LAND IS SUBJECT TO THE CWA, AND WHEN THE SACKETTS PLACED FILL MATERIAL ON THE LOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOME, EPA ISSUED AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLIANCE ORDER DIRECTING THE SACKETTS TO REMOVE THE FILL AND RESTORE THE LOT TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION. THE SACKETTS CONTEST EPA'S FINDINGS BUT BOTH THE AGENCY AND THE LOWER COURTS HAVE REFUSED TO GIVE THE SACKETTS A HEARING TO DETERMINE IF THE CWA APPLIES. A THREE-JUDGE PANEL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT RULED THEY CAN NOT GET JUDICIAL REVIEW UNLESS THEY FIRST GO THROUGH THE LIKELY FUTILE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR A FEDERAL WETLANDS PERMIT - A PROCESS THAT COULD TAKE YEARS AND COST TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. STATUS: PENIDNG. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 3/25/11. SANTA CLARA LEAD PAINT LITIGATION - PUBLIC NUISANCE LEGAL REFORM CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT IN COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA V. ARCO, THE CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL HELD THAT GOVERNMENT PLAINTIFFS MAY RETAIN PRIVATE OUTSIDE COUNSEL ON A CONTINGENT FEE BASIS TO PURSUE PUBLIC NUISANCE CLAIMS AGAINST PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS. THIS DECISION WILL ENABLE PRIVATE ATTORNEYS WITH A PROFIT MOTIVE TO PROSECUTE PURELY PUBLIC CLAIMS UNDER THE POLICE POWER OF THE STATE, AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN CALIFORNIA TO ASSERT THE PUBLIC NUISANCE THEORY AS A MEANS OF TRANSFERRING THE COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP AND REMEDIAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR. NFIB SUBMITTED A LETTER BRIEF TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT REQUESTING THAT THE COURT REVIEW AND OVERTURN THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REVIEW ON 06/06/08. AMICUS BRIEF ON THE MERITS FILED 04/23/09. SAVAGLIO V. WAL-MART - FIGHTING PUNITIVE DAMAGES REMEDY FOR OVERTIME VIOLATION CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL THE CASE, ON APPEAL FROM A $200 MILLION VERDICT (THAT INCLUDES A $115 MILLION PUNITIVE DAMAGE AWARD), CONCERNS THE CALIFORNIA STATUTE THAT MANDATES THAT AN EMPLOYER SHALL COMPENSATE AN EMPLOYEE FOR AN ADDITIONAL HOUR'S WORTH OF PAY IF THE EMPLOYEE FAILS TO TAKE A HALF-HOUR BREAK FOR EVERY FIVE HOURS OF LABOR. IN DISPUTE IS WHETHER THE STATUTE PROVIDES A PUNITIVE DAMAGES REMEDY AND WHETHER EMPLOYERS MUST ENSURE THAT BREAKS ARE ACTUALLY TAKEN. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED 7/17/08. SCHLAUD V. SNYDER- FIGHTING THE FORCED UNIONIZATION OF HOME DAY-CARE WORKERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN THIS CASE CONCERNS THE COMPULSORY UNIONIZATION OF HOME DAY CARE PROVIDERS WHERE INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES WILL BE FORCED TO PAY UNION DUES AND SERVICE FEES TO NATIONAL UNIONS, BUT THEIR EMPLOYEES WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO ANY OF THE BENEFITS TRADITIONALLY SOUGHT BY EMPLOYEES WHO UNIONIZE. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED 3/17/11. SECRETARY OF LABOR V. AVCON, INC. - FIGHTING OSHA AGAINST INCREASED LIABILITY U.S. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER, ALONG WITH A COALITION OF LIKE-MINDED INDUSTRY GROUPS, FILED A BRIEF WITH THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION (OSHRC) URGING OSHRC NOT TO PILE ADDITIONAL LIABILITY ON THE BACKS OF SMALL-BUSINESS OWNERS. IN RESPONSE TO ISSUES PENDING IN FOUR CASES BEFORE THE COMMISSION, OSHRC INVITED FRIEND-OF-THE COURT BRIEFS ON TWO IMPORTANT ISSUES RAISED BY THOSE CASES, WHETHER, CONTRARY TO CURRENT LAW: (1) INDIVIDUALS CAN BE HELD PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (OSH) ACT AND (2) OSHRC CAN AUTHORIZE SUCCESSOR LIABILITY FOR A REPEAT VIOLATION OF THE OSH ACT. FOR DECADES, A CORPORATION HAS BEEN CONSIDERED SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM ITS OWNERS OR SHAREHOLDERS. LEGITIMATE CORPORATIONS PROVIDE SMALL-BUSINESS OWNERS WITH PERSONAL LIABILITY PROTECTIONS THAT ARE VITAL TO ENCOURAGING ENTREPRENEURSHIP. IN ITS BRIEF, THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER ARGUED THAT: (1) OSHRC SHOULD NOT CHANGE EXISTING LAW AND CREATE PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR SMALL-BUSINESS OWNERS; (2) SMALL-BUSINESS OWNERS ONLY SHOULD BE HELD PERSONALLY LIABLE IN VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES, SUCH AS FRAUD; AND (3) SUCCESSOR LIABILITY SHOULD ONLY BE IMPOSED WHEN THERE IS A FINAL ORDER AGAINST THE SAME EMPLOYER OR ITS ALTER EGO FOR A SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR VIOLATION. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED 03/24/04. | |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | SECRETARY OF LABOR V. VOLKS CONSTRUCTORS - FIGHTING TO UPHOLD OSHA'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER FILED A BRIEF ASKING OSHA'S REVIEW COMMISSION TO UPHOLD THE SIX-MONTH TIME LIMIT FOR OSHA TO ISSUE A CITATION FOR A RECORD-KEEPING VIOLATION. IN THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970, CONGRESS PASSED LANGUAGE THAT "[N]O CITATION MAY BE ISSUED AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF SIX MONTHS FOLLOWING THE OCCURRENCE OF ANY VIOLATION." DESPITE THIS LAW, OSHA CONTINUES TO ISSUE CITATIONS FOR FAILING TO PROPERLY RECORD INJURIES IN ITS FORM 300 LOG FOR VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED UP TO FIVE YEARS AGO. THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER BELIEVES THAT MAKING SMALL BUSINESSES SPEND TIME AND MONEY TRYING TO RECALL THE FACTS AND FIND FORMER EMPLOYEES IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEFEND AGAINST STALE CLAIMS IS UNFAIR. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 11/27/07. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 11/2/10. SIMPKINS V. CSX TRANSPORTATION - WORKPLACE ASBESTOS EXPOSURE (PREMISES LIABILITY) SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS THE BRIEF ARGUES THAT PREMISES OWNERS, SUCH AS THE DEFENDANT RAILROAD, OWE NO LEGAL DUTY OF CARE TO REMOTE PLAINTIFFS ALLEGEDLY INJURED AS A RESULT OF SECONDHAND EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS OR OTHER SUBSTANCES EMITTED IN THE WORKPLACE. THE SUBJECT ACTION INVOLVES THE ESTATE OF A WOMAN WHO WAS ALLEGEDLY EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS CARRIED HOME ON THE PERSON AND CLOTHING OF HER FORMER HUSBAND, WHO WORKED FOR THE DEFENDANT'S PREDECESSOR RAILROAD FROM 1958 TO 1964. SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE - NLRB DECIDES WHETHER "MICRO UNIONS" PERMITTED NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD THE NLRB WILL SOON DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT LABOR UNIONS WILL BE ALLOWED TO BREAK OFF DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF WORKFORCES INTO SMALL GROUPS TO ORGANIZE FIVE OR 10 WORKERS AT A TIME INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE WORKPLACE AT ONCE - OR ORGANIZE USING "MICRO UNIONS." THE "MICRO UNIONS" WOULD ESSENTIALLY ALLOW LABOR ORGANIZERS TO SECTION OFF COMPANY EMPLOYEES BY SPECIFIC JOB DESCRIPTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A UNION WERE TRYING TO ORGANIZE A RESTAURANT STAFF, LEADERS WOULD TARGET SERVERS, BUSBOYS, DISHWASHERS, COOKS AND HOSTESSES SEPARATELY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 3/7/11. STAPLETON V. CITIZENS NATIONAL - LEGAL REFORM KENTUCKY SUPREME COURT THE COURT IS REVIEWING WHETHER BUSINESS OWNERS OWE A DUTY TO CUSTOMERS TO WARN OR REMOVE NATURAL CONDITIONS SUCH AS SNOW AND ICE. THE CURRENT STANDARD, WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR DECADES, IMPOSES NO SUCH DUTY UNLESS ACTIONS BY THE BUSINESS OWNER HEIGHTEN OR CONCEAL THE HAZARD OF THE NATURAL CONDITION. OVERTURNING LONGTIME PRECEDENT ON THIS ISSUE WOULD BE AN UNREASONABLE BURDEN UPON BUSINESSES. ADDITIONALLY, THE "NO DUTY" RULE CURRENTLY DOES NOT ACT TO DISCOURAGE KENTUCKY BUSINESSES FROM REMOVING SNOW AND ICE, AS THEIR MAIN GOAL IS NOT TO AVOID LIABILITY BUT INSTEAD TO ATTRACT CUSTOMERS THROUGH COMPETITION, QUALITY, AND SERVICE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED JANUARY 2011. STATE OF FLORIDA V. HHS - NFIB SUES TO STOP HEALTH CARE LAW U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ON MAY 14, 2010, NFIB JOINED THE MULTI-STATE LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. THE SUIT WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF NFIB BY THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LEGAL CLAIMS IN THE LAWSUIT, HOWEVER, NFIB IS PRIMARILY CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. NFIB STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT CONGRESS LACKS THE AUTHORITY TO FORCE AMERICANS TO PURCHASE A PRIVATE PRODUCT, SUCH AS HEALTH INSURANCE, OR FACE PAYING A PENALTY. ON JANUARY 31, 2011, FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGE ROGER VINSON RULED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IN THE HEALTHCARE LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. JUDGE VINSON ALSO FOUND THAT THE MANDATE CAN NOT BE SEVERED FROM THE REST OF THE HEALTHCARE LAW, THE ENTIRE ACT MUST BE DECLARED VOID." THE GOVERNMENT HAS APPEALED JUDGE VINSON'S RULING TO THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT WHERE BRIEFING IS SCHEDULED TO CONCLUDE IN MAY 2011. STATUS: PENDING. STAUB V. PROCTOR HOSPITAL - EMPLOYER LIABILITY FOR SUBORDINATE'S DISCRIMINATION U.S. SUPREME COURT THE ISSUE IS WHETHER AN EMPLOYER CAN BE HELD LIABLE BASED ON POTENTIALLY UNLAWFUL INTENT OF OFFICIALS WHO CAUSED OR INFLUENCED BUT DID NOT MAKE THE ULTIMATE EMPLOYMENT DECISION. THE EMPLOYEE ASSERTED THAT HE WAS FIRED BASED ON HIS ASSOCIATION WITH THE MILITARY. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT HELD THAT NO REASONABLE JURY COULD HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE PLAINTIFF WAS FIRED BECAUSE HE WAS A MEMBER OF THE MILITARY. THE CONTROVERSY IN THIS CASE IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE "CAT'S PAW" DOCTRINE. UNDER THIS THEORY, DISCRIMINATION CAN BE PROVEN EVEN WHEN THE DECISIONMAKER HERSELF IS ADMITTEDLY UNBIASED IF THE DISCRIMINATORY ANIMUS OF A NON-DECISIONMAKER IS IMPUTED TO THE DECISIONMAKER. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 9/8/10. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 11/2/10. COURT FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF ON 3/1/11. STEWART & JASPER ORCHARDS V. SALAZAR - UNCONSTITUTIONAL INTRASTATE AG WATER RESTRICTIONS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND THE STATE WATER PROJECT ARE THE TWO WATER SYSTEMS THAT PUMP NECESSARY WATER FROM THE NORTH TO THE SOUTH. IN 2008, THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (FWS) LIMITED THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT CAN BE PUMPED THROUGH THE SYSTEMS BASED UPON ENVIRONMENTALISTS' ARGUMENTS THAT PUMPING THREATENED THE SMELT POPULATION. AS A RESULT, THOUSANDS OF SMALL BUSINESSES NO LONGER GET THE WATER THEY NEED TO SUSTAIN THEIR COMPANIES. CALIFORNIA'S WATER AGENCIES HAVE CALLED IT "THE MOST DRASTIC CUTS EVER TO CALIFORNIA WATER." THE NEW LAWSUIT SUPPORTED BY THE LEGAL CENTER HAS TWO MAIN ARGUMENTS. FIRST, THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT SCIENTIFIC CONNECTION DEMONSTRATING THAT THE FISH KILLED DURING PUMPING ACTUALLY THREATENS THE EXISTENCE OF THE SMELT. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF FARMERS CHALLENGING THE FEDERAL WATER RESTRICTIONS ON 6/2/10. ORAL ARGUMENTS ON 2/15/11. IN MARCH 2011, THE COURT RULED THAT THE WATER RESTRICTIONS ARE CONSTITUTIONAL. STOP THE BEACH RENOURISHMENT V. FLA. DEPT. OF ENVIR. PROTECTION - GOVERNMENT TAKINGS U.S. SUPREME COURT THE SUPREME COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT VIOLATED THE TAKINGS CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION WHEN IT UPHELD THE FLORIDA BEACH AND SHORE PRESERVATION ACT. THE LAW AUTHORIZES THE STATE TO CONVERT PRIVATE WATERFRONT PROPERTY INTO A PUBLIC BEACH THUS DEPRIVING LAND OWNERS OF THEIR FULL LITTORAL RIGHTS WITHOUT COMPENSATION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF LANDOWNERS ON 8/16/09. COURT RULED AGAINST THE LANDOWNERS IN JUNE 2010. THOMPSON V. NORTH AMERICAN STAINLESS - DEFINING SCOPE OF TITLE VII ANTI-RETALIATION BAR U.S. SUPREME COURT THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER TITLE VII'S ANTI-RETALIATION PROVISION PROTECTS AN EMPLOYEE WHO ALLEGED HE WAS TERMINATED IN RETALIATION FOR HIS THEN-FIANCE'S EEOC CLAIM ALLEGING SEX DISCRIMINATION. THOMPSON'S FIANCE, MIRIAM REGALADO, FILED AN EEOC CHARGE AGAINST NORTH AMERICAN STAINLESS FOR GENDER DISCRIMINATION. THREE WEEKS LATER, THE COMPANY TERMINATED THOMPSON, CLAIMING IT WAS FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED REASONS. THOMPSON ALLEGED UNLAWFUL RETALIATION UNDER TITLE VII. THE COMPANY COUNTERED THAT HE WAS NOT RETALIATED AGAINST WITHIN THE MEANING OF TITLE VII BECAUSE THOMPSON DID NOT ACTIVELY OPPOSE ANY UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE OR PARTICIPATE IN ANY DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 10/29/10. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 12/7/10. DECIDED 1/24/11 IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF. TURKEN V. GORDON - CHALLENGING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDIES ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT FOR MARICOPA COUNTY ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS ARIZONA SUPREME COURT THE ISSUE IS WHETHER THE CITY OF PHOENIX'S $97.4 MILLION SALES TAX INCENTIVE GIVEN TO AN OUT-OF-STATE DEVELOPER VIOLATES THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION'S PROHIBITION AGAINST TAX PAYER SUBSIDIES. THE MAJORITY OF NFIB MEMBERS IN ARIZONA DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD PROVIDE TAX INCENTIVES TO BUSINESSES TO LOCATE OR RELOCATE TO A PARTICULAR CITY OR TOWN. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF TAX PAYERS CHALLENGING THE SUBSIDY ON 1/07/08. COURT DISMISSED PLAINTIFFS' LAWSUIT ON 4/2/08. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' APPEAL TO THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS ON 7/23/08. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN ARIZONA SUPREME COURT 7/16/09. | |
| SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2010 (CONT.) | VICKNAIR V. PHELPS DODGE - FORUM SHOPPING NORTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT VICTORY! IN A MOVE AIMED TO CURB FORUM-SHOPPING PLAINTIFFS, DEFENDANT ARGUED THAT NORTH DAKOTA'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS APPLIES TO CLAIMS BROUGHT BY NONRESIDENTS WHO HAVE NO CONNECTION TO NORTH DAKOTA. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ON 7/22/10. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS AND THE TRIAL COURT'S DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS. WEINSTAT V. DENTSPLY, INT'L - CONSUMER PROTECTION CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT AFTER A CASE CALLED TOBACCO II, CALIFORNIA COURTS HAVE BEEN SPLIT AS TO WHETHER THE COURT'S HOLDING MEANS THAT CLASS CERTIFICATION IS DIFFERENT (AND EASIER) IN CONSUMER CASES, OR NOT. THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT IN THE SUBJECT CASE DECIDED THE FORMER WAS TRUE. IT WENT FURTHER BY HOLDING THAT PROOF OF RELIANCE ON A WARRANTY PROMISE IS NOT IMPORTANT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REVIEW ON 03/15/10. REVIEW DENIED 04/14/10. WILLIAMS V. AMERICAN OPTICAL CORP. - DEFENDING MEDICAL CRITERIA LAW IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION COURT OF APPEALS OF FLORIDA IN A SERIES OF ASBESTOS PENDING IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF FLORIDA, THE LEGAL CENTER FILED FOUR BRIEFS DEFENDING FLORIDA'S MEDICAL CRITERIA LAW. THIS STATUTE REQUIRES THAT CLAIMANTS IN ASBESTOS CASES MEET CERTAIN OBJECTIVE MEDICAL CRITERIA BEFORE FILING SUIT. THE LAW IS INTENDED TO HELP IMPEDE THE MASS FILINGS BY UNIMPAIRED CLAIMANTS THAT HAVE CREATED JUDICIAL BACKLOGS IN THE COURTS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEFS WERE FILED ON 09/07/07. | |
| FORM 990 PROVIDED TO GOVERNING BODY | PART VI, SECTION B: GOVERNING BODY AND MANAGEMENT, LINE 11 | FOLLOWING AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, A DRAFT OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S FORM 990 IS PREPARED. THIS FORM 990 IS REVIEWED INTERNALLY BY NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S TAX ACCOUNTANT,CONTROLLER/TREASURER, AND SVP/CFO. ANY QUESTIONS ARISING FROM THE INITIAL REVIEW ARE ADDRESSED TO ENSURE THE RETURN IS COMPLETE AND ACCURATE. ANY NECESSARY CHANGES/CORRECTIONS ARE MADE ON THE FORM 990 AND THE RETURN AGAIN GOES THROUGH NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S INTERNAL REVIEW PROCESS. UPON APPROVAL OF THE SVP/CFO, THE FINAL RETURN IS FILED WITH THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. THE FINAL FILED RETURN IS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR REVIEW. |
| WRITTEN CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY | PART VI, SECTION B: POLICIES, LINE 12 | EACH BOARD MEMBER, OFFICER AND EMPLOYEE OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IS REQUIRED TO SIGN AND SUBMIT A CODE OF CONDUCT & ETHICS CERTIFICATION FORM TO THE CFO'S OFFICE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. BY COMPLETING THIS FORM, HE/SHE CONFIRMS THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THE CODE AND AGREES TO CONDUCT HIMSELF/HERSELF IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE AND APPLICABLE LAWS. HE/SHE ALSO MUST LIST ON THE FORM ANY CONFLICTS OR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST HE/SHE MAY HAVE WITH NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER AND ANY OTHER ETHICAL CONCERNS ABOUT WHICH HE/SHE FEELS NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER SHOULD BE MADE AWARE. THE CFO'S OFFICE WILL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE FINANCE/AUDIT COMMITTEE REGARDING ANY MATERIAL ETHICAL OR LEGAL ISSUES DISCLOSED ON THE CERTIFICATION FORMS. |
| PROCESS OF DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR OFFICERS AND OTHER KEY EMPLOYEES | PART VI, SECTION B: POLICIES, LINE 15 | THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND KEY EMPLOYEE OF THE ORGANIZATION. THE TREASURER'S AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION IS REVIEWED AND SET BY THE CEO. IN 2008, AN OUTSIDE COMPENSATION CONSULTING FIRM WAS ENGAGED TO PROVIDE EXPERT INFORMATION REGARDING INDUSTRY-WIDE COMPENSATION NORMS AND AGAIN IN LATE 2010. RESULTS OF THE 2010 INDEPENDENT REVIEW ARE EXPECTED IN EARLY 2011 AND WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE RELIES ON THIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT REASONABLE COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND KEY EMPLOYEE. THE COMMITTEE'S PHILOSOPHY IS TO ENSURE THAT THE COMPENSATION FOR THESE POSITIONS RELATIVE TO MARKET COMPARISONS IS COMPETITIVE IN ORDER TO ATTRACT, RETAIN AND MOTIVATE QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES WHILE NOT BEING AT THE TOP OF THE RANGE. THE COMMITTEE SETS THE COMPENSATION FOR THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND KEY EMPLOYEE EACH YEAR DURING THEIR MEETING WHICH IS TYPICALLY HELD IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY. MINUTES FROM THESE ANNUAL MEETINGS ARE TAKEN BY THE CORPORATE SECRETARY DURING THE MEETING. WHEN THE MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED, THEY ARE RETAINED WITH ALL OTHER CORPORATE RECORDS. |
| DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC | PART VI, SECTION C: DISCLOSURE, LINE 19 | IT IS NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S ("THE CENTER") POLICY TO MAKE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION, UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON, ITS EXEMPTION APPLICATION, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND ANY LETTER OR DOCUMENT ISSUED BY THE IRS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION. THE CENTER ALSO MAKES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION AND COPYING, UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON, ITS FEDERAL FORM 990, RETURN OF ORGANIZATION EXEMPT FROM INCOME TAX. THE FORM 990 IS AVAILABLE FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING WITH THE DUE DATE OF THE RETURN (INCLUDING ANY EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING). THE FOUNDATION'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON. |
| AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | FORM 990, PART XII, LINE 2 | NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010 WERE AUDITED ON A SEPARATE BASIS AS WELL AS PART OF NFIB, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. NFIB, INC. HAS AN AUDIT COMMITTEE WHICH ASSUMES THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OVERSIGHT OF THE AUDIT OF ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE SELECTION OF AN INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT. |
| HOURS DEVOTED FOR RELATED ORGANIZATION | FORM 990 PART VII | NAME:DONALD A DANNER TITLE:PRESIDENT/CEO HOURS:40 |
| HOURS DEVOTED FOR RELATED ORGANIZATION | FORM 990 PART VII | NAME:MARY BLASINSKY TITLE:SVP/SECRETARY HOURS:40 |
| HOURS DEVOTED FOR RELATED ORGANIZATION | FORM 990 PART VII | NAME:TAMMY S BOEHMS TITLE:SVP/CFO HOURS:40 |
| HOURS DEVOTED FOR RELATED ORGANIZATION | FORM 990 PART VII | NAME:JEFF SMITH TITLE:TREASURER HOURS:40 |
| HOURS DEVOTED FOR RELATED ORGANIZATION | FORM 990 PART VII | NAME:SUSAN M ECKERLY TITLE:SVP HOURS:35 |
Schedule R IRS990ScheduleR
Form990 Schedule R Part II Form990ScheduleRPartII (4 entries)
| Address Line1AddressUS/AddressLine1 | CityAddressUS/City | StateAddressUS/State | ZIP CodeAddressUS/ZIPCode | EINEIN | Primary ActivitiesPrimaryActivities | Legal Domicile StateLegalDomicileState | Exempt Code SectionExemptCodeSection | Public Charity StatusPublicCharityStatus | Business Name Line1DirectControllingEntityName/BusinessNameLine1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUS | |||||||||
| 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | NASHVILLE | TN | 37214 | 940707299 | MEM. REPRES. | CA | 501(C)(6) | N/A | NA |
| NFIB RESEARCH FOUNDATION | |||||||||
| 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | NASHVILLE | TN | 37214 | 043592337 | RESEARCH | TN | 501(C)(3) | SUP. ORG. I | NFIB |
| NFIB YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR FOUNDATION | |||||||||
| 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | NASHVILLE | TN | 37214 | 621557196 | EDUCATION | TN | 501(C)(3) | SUP. ORG. I | NFIB |
| NFIB FEDERAL SAFE TRUST | |||||||||
| 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | NASHVILLE | TN | 37214 | 942532364 | PAC | CA | 527 | N/A | NFIB |
Form990 Schedule R Part IV Form990ScheduleRPartIV
Name Of Related Org NameOfRelatedOrg
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | NFIB MEMBER SERVICES CORPORATION | BusinessNameLine1 |
Address US AddressUS
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Address Line1 | 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 | AddressLine1 |
| City | NASHVILLE | City |
| State | TN | State |
| ZIP Code | 372143682 | ZIPCode |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| EIN | 942899404 | EIN |
| Primary Activity | MEMBER BENEFITS | PrimaryActivity |
| Legal Domicile State | CA | LegalDomicileState |
Direct Controlling Entity Name DirectControllingEntityName
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Business Name Line1 | NA | BusinessNameLine1 |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Type Of Entity | C | TypeOfEntity |
| Field | Value | IRS element (for citing) |
|---|---|---|
| Receipt Of Int Ann Rents Royalties | false | ReceiptOfIntAnnRentsRoyalties |
| Gift Grant Or Cap Contr To Other Org | false | GiftGrantOrCapContrToOtherOrg |
| Gift Grant Or Cap Contr Fr Other Org | true | GiftGrantOrCapContrFrOtherOrg |
| Loans Or Guarantees To Other Org | false | LoansOrGuaranteesToOtherOrg |
| Loans Or Guarantees From Other Org | false | LoansOrGuaranteesFromOtherOrg |
| Sale Of Assets To Other Org | false | SaleOfAssetsToOtherOrg |
| Purchase Of Assets From Other Org | false | PurchaseOfAssetsFromOtherOrg |
| Exchange Of Assets | false | ExchangeOfAssets |
| Rental Of Facilities To Other Orgs | false | RentalOfFacilitiesToOtherOrgs |
| Rental Of Facilities Fr Other Orgs | false | RentalOfFacilitiesFrOtherOrgs |
| Perform Of Services For Other Orgs | false | PerformOfServicesForOtherOrgs |
| Perform Of Services By Other Orgs | false | PerformOfServicesByOtherOrgs |
| Sharing Of Facilities | true | SharingOfFacilities |
| Sharing Of Paid Employees | true | SharingOfPaidEmployees |
| Reimbursement Paid To Other Org | true | ReimbursementPaidToOtherOrg |
| Reimbursement Paid By Other Org | true | ReimbursementPaidByOtherOrg |
| Other Transfer To Other Org | false | OtherTransferToOtherOrg |
| Other Transfer From Other Org | false | OtherTransferFromOtherOrg |
Transactions Related Orgs Table TransactionsRelatedOrgsTable (4 entries)
| Transaction TypeTransactionType | Amount InvolvedAmountInvolved |
|---|---|
| NFIB YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR FOUNDATION | |
| LINE | 282548 |
| NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS | |
| LINE | 123319 |
| NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS | |
| LINE | 173038 |
| NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS | |
| LINE | 93593 |
Comments