Author Archives: ligitsec

Legal Needs of Low-Income Families

According to a recent study, two-thirds of low income residents who seek legal help are turned away. James Sandman, President of the Legal Services Corporation, a federal agency that finances legal aid groups, civil legal needs are met only about 20 percent of the time for low-income families in America.

The Massachusetts study on legal aid highlights that a large increase in state funding would be a smart investment. Inadequate legal aid has significant consequences. The study concludes that the state could potentially save money in other services such as emergency shelter, healthcare, foster care and law enforcement. Moreover, cases would be handled more quickly and this would be especially beneficial for victims of domestic violence since it would help avoid large medical and other costs.

It is ironic that despite an increase in people without legal aid (or adequate legal aid), the congressional funding for Legal Services Corporation has actually been reduced to $365 million this year as compared to $420 million in 2010. This could have diverse effects on the system since the population below 125 percent of the poverty line is increasing and the number of people in need of legal aid is higher than ever.

A large number of people who do not qualify for legal aid have no option but to represent themselves. This would be effective if the legal system was friendlier with simple procedures but since that is not the case, it is difficult for the general population to defend themselves without assistance from lawyers.

According to Cassandra Goodman, the supervising lawyer at the Center on the Legal Profession at Stanford University, lawyers can make a vital difference. This is especially true for immigrants who are not completely fluent in the language and become intimidated by seasoned lawyers and bewildering paperwork. They have no hope of defending themselves against eviction, high rents, and domestic violence or in child custody disputes.

Several alternatives have popped up in light of the system’s failure to provide legal assistance to the poor. The Eviction Assistance Center is a legal aid office and is part of an experiment by the California courts to provide legal advice and lawyers to low-income people. There is the Neighbourhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County that is funded by the Shriver Project and is providing full or partial assistance to tenants who are facing eviction.

There are similar ongoing projects in New York, Massachusetts and elsewhere but are working toward helping needy clients but there is still a justice gap that needs to be filled and that definitely requires attention.

McAdoo Files Lawsuit against University of North Carolina

Michael McAdoo, a former University of North Carolina football player, has filed a lawsuit against the school on the grounds that the school failed to provide him and other athletes a quality education. The class-action lawsuit was filed this week in US District Court in Charlotte.

According to McAdoo, the school had guaranteed him a good education while being recruited by football coaches. However, he claims that he was guided toward sham classes and was asked to consider three options, one of which was African-American Studies. McAdoo’s attorney says, “We’re not out to vilify UNC. We’re trying to restore the student-athlete principle that UNC’s really been for so long in the forefront of.”

McAdoo played football at UNC from 2008 to 2010 but was ruled ineligible in 2010 for academic violations connected to a tutor who was providing improper assistance on a certain research paper for class.

A detailed report prepared by U.S. Justice Department official Kenneth Wainstein, outlines how more than 3100 athletes at UNC took no-show classes in the formerly named African and Afro-American studies department for nearly two decades. The report highlights how these classes resulted in artificially high grades and the school faculty and administrators looked the other way.

The report also reveals that nearly half of the students enrolled in these bogus classes were athletes. The athletic staff steered players to classes when they saw them struggling to meet the grades that were required to continue playing.

McAdoo also states in the lawsuit that UNC coaches and other representatives enticed the student athletes to sign agreements that promised a legitimate UNC education. But instead they were guided toward a shadow curriculum of bogus courses that were specifically designed to provide enrollees high grades. There were hundreds of courses which never involved a professor.

The lawsuit also claims that UNC has reaped significant profits from their student athletes but has provided them nothing in return. It is thus a breach of contract and is in violation of North Carolina law. The lawsuit accuses the school of fraud by promising a legitimate education and failing to do so.

Copyright Infringement When No Heir Apparent

The recent controversy about Vivian Maier’s pictures brings forth a major issue that is often seen in legacy and estate related matters. Maier spent her life working as a nanny and kept her artistic life a secret. When she died in 2009, penniless and with no family, her pictures were discovered and declared to be one of the most remarkable pieces of art in the 20th century. Since her heir was unknown, it became quite a challenge for the courts to declare her heir.

Since there was no heir apparent, Maier’s images were being sold by people who came to own the negatives. They had no connection to her but still had access to prints of her work.

John Maloof, a former real estate agent bought tens of thousands of the negatives for a mere $400 and then spent years promoting her work in galleries, museums, exhibitions, books and a documentary. It is believed that Maloof paid an undisclosed amount for the rights to her work to Sylvain Jassaud who had been identified as her closest relative.

David C. Deal, a lawyer and a former commercial photographer took it upon himself to try and track down Maier’s heir. He hired his own genealogists and travelled to Maier’s home town in France. He was able to track down a Mr. Baille who was then recognized to be Maier’s heir under American law.

The exploitation of Maier’s work highlights a loophole in the legal system with respect to copyright infringement. Under federal copyright law, the copyright owner of an image controls whether these images are reproduced or sold. An individual can own a negative or a print but he still does not have the copyright to market/reproduce.
The way Maloof profited from Maier’s work seems completely unfair because he had no legal copyright to do so. Under the eyes of the law, Maloof (and other owners including Jeffery Goldstein) were breaking the law.

Estate cases like Maier’s area generally complicated because their relatives are not United States citizens. It may take years to find the rightful heir but with the right lawyers and the right legal representation, it can be done.

A similar legal battle has taken place over the literary rights to Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. The heirs have filed an appeal with the Supreme Court to stop the publication of new stories which have recently been commissioned and are expected to be out later this year. Doyle’s heirs argue that the characters have continued to develop throughout the course of all Holmes works and they are seeking copyright protection.

Copyright protection is thus a controversial aspect and can often result in legal battles that can continue for long periods of time.

Product Liability: Mattel Pays $2.3 Million Penalty for Toys Containing Lead Paint

In an agreement with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Mattel and its subsidiary Fisher-Price will pay $2.3 million in civil penalties for toys made in China containing high levels of lead paint. Lead paint has been shown to cause injury when ingested and is banned in the United States. This defective products penalty is the highest of its kind imposed by the CPSC.

The Mattel civil penalty sheds more light over recent concerns by Congress that some Chinese-made products don’t meet United States standards for consumer safety. Defective products originating in China from pet food to baby formula were pulled from U.S. shelves and came under FDA scrutiny when they were shown to contain ingredients that may be harmful to animals and people. The Mattel penalty involves importing and distributing non-compliant toys containing lead paint, including Sarge cars and Barbie accessories.

Experienced Florida product liability lawyers know how to interpret federal and state laws designed to protect consumers from faulty or defective products.

Other Defective Chinese Products: Faulty Drywall in Florida Construction
Earlier this year, we wrote about how some faulty construction materials made in China may be affecting people’s health and the air quality in their homes. (See South Florida Construction Product Liability: Faulty Chinese Drywall to Be Tested.)

Senators are seeking funding to continue studying this problem in Florida construction liabilityand in home building around the country.

Mattel to Pay $2.3 Million Penalty for Toy Hazard
Bloomberg.com June 5, 2009

Senators Seek Funds for Chinese Drywall Study
Environmental Protection June 5, 2009

Miller Thomson considers merger

Miller Thomson LLP, the national law firm that unrolled a new marketing communications campaign on Monday, is considering a merger with another law firm that could be approved by partners as early as next week.

“Our brand launch is the beginning the next phase of the firm’s growth ambitions,” said Pierre Paquet, the Montreal-based partner who is Miller Thomson’s national lead for business development and marketing on the firm’s executive committee.

Paquet made the statement as the low-profile Miller Thomson moved to boost its visibility as a national firm with nine offices across Canada and more than 450 lawyers -a number that puts its among the top 10 biggest law firms in Canada.

In an interview, Paquet said the firm is not looking at joining forces with an international law firm such as the planned merger of Ogilvy Renault LLP with the Britain’s Norton Rose Group.

“No it’s not in the cards,” Paquet said. The law firm – like many others -is looking at ways to court European and Asian investors’ interest in Canada’s natural resources and other sectors, but the majority of its clients are not working on the international stage.

But asked about whether or not there are plans to merge with a Canadian player, Paquet replied, “Soon.”

“Nothing is for sure until it is for sure,” he added. “We will know next week.”

Given that the Miller Thomson partners have to vote on any merger option, Paquet did not want to reveal any details about the potential partner’s geographic location.

The Montreal office itself is a product of a merger in 2005 between Pouliot Mercure and Toronto-based Miller Thomson and in the past 10 years, the firm has added offices in Edmonton and Calgary (1999), Vancouver (2000) Kitchener-Waterloo and Guelph and London in Ontario (2002, 2003, 2006). It still operates locally as Miller Thomson Pouliot.

This week’s rebranding exercise, with a new website and a national multimedia advertising campaign planned for early next year, is

aimed at showing that Miller Thomson “is not just a collection of offices across the country,” as chief executive Gerald Courage put it, but a coordinated whole. In a promotional video, Courage said the rebranding followed “a careful, introspective process to make us consider who we are and who we want to be.”

It is fair to say that many law firms are pondering their situation given the changing legal and economic landscape and looking for ways to market their capabilities and highlight geographic positioning either in Canada or abroad.

Like Ogilvy Renault, some of the big firms have been approached by international players.

Bywayof example, McCarthy Tetrault LLP was approached -at a very preliminary level -by another unnamed British firm similar to Norton Rose and one unconfirmed published report said Norton Rose had earlier talked with Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP.

Such tie-ups are said to not be practical for some of the bigger firms who count on referral work from so-called “best friends” -U.S. firms that refer work to Canada to different law offices depending on the client and the mandate. Profit-sharing models can also dramatically differ and how to avoid downsizing is also a factor.

In the meantime, Miller Thomson’s Montreal office continues to grow.

In the past few weeks it poached Aaron Rodgers and Julie Gaudreault-Martel, both tax litigators who were practicing with Spiegel Sohmer Inc., to join the six-lawyer tax team headed by Richard Fontaine. The Montreal office also recently hired Melanie Lantin as its first marketing and business development officer, more of a necessity as law firms are increasingly called upon to make presentations for corporate clients and draw up formal proposals to bid on work with competing firms.

Top lawyers named in six categories

Six lawyers out of 18 finalists were named Lawyer of the Year in six categories at a gala organized by the Young Bar Association of Montreal late last week.

All were chosen by a jury headed by Francois Rolland, chief justice of Quebec Superior Court, and made up of top members of the Quebec legal establishment -and will each be profiled (in alphabetical order) on Legal Matters, The Gazette’s online legal page at www.montrealgazette.com/legalmatters.

The first to be featured as Lawyer of the Week on Legal Matters is Ponora Ang, a lawyer with McMillan LLP who won in the litigation category for his work on big files such as the Castor Holdings case and BCE Inc.

Other winners include: Corporate law: Thierry Lavigne Martel, a fiscal law specialist and partner at Martel, Cantin who specializes in advising small-and medium-size Quebec businesses; Family law: Myriam Farag, a family law specialist formerly with O’Hanlon, Sanders, Teixeira and Maria R. Battaglia, avocats who now manages the content of more than 300 legal information files produced by Educaloi, a non-profit organization that promotes access to justice by providing easy-to-understand information about the law. In-house counsel: Adina Comanita, director of the legal department at Landmark Properties Inc., a real estate management company that oversees commercial properties across Canada; Pro Bono: Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, a lawyer with Delegatus services juridiques inc. who cofounded Generation d’idees, an independent, non-partisan and non-profit thought group focused on the future of young people in Quebec; Criminal law: Julie Provost, a lawyer with Montreal municipal court responsible for the implementation and co-ordination of a pilot project -a first in Quebec -to accompany people with mental health issues appearing before the court and look out for their interests.

This article first appeared on Montreal Gazette on November 26, 2010

Mayor Pringle on Why Anahein is Appealing Angels Name-Change Verdict

The city’s lawsuit against Angels Baseball has been fun for no one – least of all the parties involved. But in order to protect the interests of Anaheim taxpayers and uphold the sanctity of contracts, it was a lawsuit the Anaheim City Council had to pursue.

After the jury verdict came out against the City of Anaheim, my colleagues and I spent the next few months carefully consideration whether we should appeal the verdict. After judging the information before us, we voted in closed session last week to pursue an appeal. Mayor Pro Tem Richard Chavez, Councilman Bob Hernandez, Councilwoman Lorri Galloway and I voted to appeal. Councilman Harry Sidhu voted against an appeal and to instead accept the jury verdict.

Believe me, I wish this whole matter could be resolved between the parties and made to go away. And the city tried to no avail, to negotiate with the Angels over these last months for a mutually beneficial outcome. But we have a duty to the citizens of Anaheim to hold the Angels to their contract, and I want to present to you our reasons for appealing the verdict.

Jury Instruction Errors
A number of errors were made in the conduct of the trial that negatively impacted Anaheim’s case.

For example, the attorney who represented Anaheim during the contract negotiations with the Angels – when the stipulation about the team name was made — was not allowed to testify.

Also, the judge barred other witnesses who would have helped Anaheim’s case from testifying, including witnesses who could testify to the value to our city of having the team be the “Anaheim” Angels.

The nature of the jury instructions also hurt Anaheim’s case and helped put the jury on course to ruling against us. We asked to have a number of elements included in those instructions. For example, we asked that the jury be allowed to consider outside evidence regarding the intent of the parties when negotiating the current contract between Anaheim and the Angeles. In other words, when the jury considered any ambiguity in the language of the contract’s team name requirement, we believed the jury should have been allowed to consider outside evidence in order to determine what the intent was of contract parties.

But this reasonable request was denied.

There was also a witness who had been one of Disney’s early on negotiators on the contract with Anaheim that led to the team being re-named the Anaheim Angels in 1996. This witness testified as to what Disney’s intent – or at least his own – in allowing the team-naming language to be somewhat loose.

We wanted the jury to be instructed that “unexpressed intent” could NOT be considered, which is clear in California contract law – but our request was denied in this as well.

Interviews with the jury members following the trail also made it clear these factors influenced the jury to rule against Anaheim, and helped convince a super-majority of the city council to pursue an appeal.

Even so, Anaheim’s preference is to resolve the issue outside the courtroom, and we have been in contact with Angels Baseball during the last several months in hopes of doing just that.

Angels’ Want Anaheim Taxpayers To Foot The Bill
Unfortunately, we are unable to make headway due to Angels Baseball’s insistence on continuing to pursue billing Anaheim taxpayers for their legal expenses – and that is unacceptable to me and my colleagues who voted to appeal the verdict.

There is no “loser pays” provision in either California law or the city’s contract with the Angels – and we refuse to be penalized for acting to hold Angels Baseball to the terms of the contract they had with the citizens of Anaheim.

If Anaheim wins the appeal, we won’t have to worry about paying Angel Baseball’s legal bill. Since our attorney’s have agreed to cap their fee at $150,000 for the appeal, I think many would agree that it is smarter to pursue a strong case for appeal than to simply give up and pay the Angels’ multi-million legal fees.

Written Judgment Paves Way For Angels To Leave Anaheim If We Don’t Appeal
There’s one aspect of the verdict that has hardly been covered in the media, despite its serious consequences for Anaheim: the written judgment.

This is the document that actually sets down the terms by which the parties to the lawsuit must abide.

As it stands, the written judgment allows Angels Baseball to call the team anything it wants – anything at all. The team could completely erase any mention of Anaheim from anything Angels related – logos, merchandise, marketing, promotions – as long as somewhere in some legal filing the team was called the “Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.” We know this because we asked the judge if the team could call itself and market itself as the “Los Angels Angels” and he confirmed it.

We believe that this written judgment goes far beyond what the jury decided, but it will stand if we do not appeal. If we do not appeal, Angels Baseball is free to market the team without any reference to Anaheim – even as the team plays in a stadium they did not pay to build and for which they pay no rent, and otherwise enjoys the financial benefits of an extraordinarily one-sided contract.

One of the only real benefits Anaheim received was the publicity resulting from the team being called the Anaheim Angels. That name was essentially the rent the team paid to the taxpayers of Anaheim.

I believe failure to appeal this verdict paves the road for the Angels to leave Anaheim. If during the next 10 years under the contract the Angels only referred to themselves only as the Los Angeles Angels with no mention of Anaheim, then they will be identifying themselves with another region and laying the groundwork for re-locating when the contract expires.

Mayor Pro Tem Chavez, Coouncil members Hernandez and Galloway, and I understand that and acted accordingly – and, we are convinced, rightly.

A final note as to the city’s legal fees, which amount to about $4 million. This money hasn’t come from the General Fund, but from an “enterprise fund”: monies budgeted for operating city facilities such as the Stadium or the Convention Center. As I mentioned, legal fees for the appeal are capped at $150,000.

No one on the City Council enjoys paying legal bills for the city, but we are adamantly opposed to paying other people’s attorneys fees when we are only fighting to protect ourselves.

If there were an acceptable alternative to appealing the verdict, we would explore it. However, given that:

• Jury interviews showed errors caused by the Court molded the opinion of the jurors against the city’s position,

• The Angels insist Anaheim taxpayers pay their attorneys fees,

• And the written judgment allows the team to call itself anything it wants, paving the way for the Angels to leave Anaheim,

…the only course open to us, is an appeal.

It is my sincere hope the three appellate judge panel hearing the case will correct the errors made and allow for a fair hearing to be presented. I will keep you updated as new information presents itself.

Kupas Habis Saat ini Pula Kelebihan Dari Situs Slot Online Terpercaya

Berikut Di bawah Ini Beberapa Kelebihan Situs Slot Online Yang Butuh Anda Kupas Tuntas

Memiliki model pemain slot yang bermacam macam versi

Untuk anda banyak penggemar perjudian slot ini, jangan sempat salah memutuskan suatu web yang menadahi permainan itu. Mengapa begitu? Hak itu disebabkan kalau anda salah menunjuk sebuah situs slot online, ditakuti bisa terjadi satu soal yang tidak sekali-kali anda pengin. Yang di mana momen itu misalkan seperti peniupan serta selaku hal yang lain kembali. Penting anda pahami yang di mana sekarang suatu perjudian slot merasakan kemajuan yang fantastis. Kenapa tak? Hal semacam itu bisa anda tonton di suatu web on-line yang di mana siapkan beragam ragam vs permainan slot.

Dan di mana seluruhnya versus slot yang dikasihkan atau ditunjukkan pada suatu situs buat satu orang permainkan bisa memberi sebuah keuntungan buat tiap-tiap personal yang sukses menjadi pemenangnya. Serta butuh anda kenali pula kalau seluruh vs slot ini dipunyai oleh sebuah situa yang saat ini sedang diyakini serta udah di sarankan oleh orang dari beberapa golongan. Sebab dari seluruhnya vs itu bisa terbuktikan miliki kehebohan yang berlainan. Sampai permainan yang berlainan vs serta penampakan itu, bisa serta bisa menimbulkan perhatian seluruhnya orang khususnya banyak pemain yang masuk di website itu.

Menyediakan jekpot serta bonus tambahan secara besar besaran

Mendapatkan suatu keuntungan atau yang kerap disebutkan jekpot di perjudian slot ini sebuah kemauan serta maksud yang dipunyai oleh seorang. Yang di mana perlu anda kenali pun di sebuah situs slot online dapat dipercaya, saat ini telab berani memberi suatu jekpot besar besaran buat anda yang untung meraih kemenangan perminaan judi slot itu dengan score yang tinggi. Akan tetapi apa kalau memperoleh score rendah tak mendapatkam jekpot?. Hal demikian sangatlah tak betul, yang dimanan kendati anda memperoleh score rendah atau menengah, anda masih dapat mendapati hadiah dari situs itu karena kemenangan yang diperoleh. Akan tetapi yang di mana jekpot atau hadiah itu tak sebesar dari pemain yang sukses raih kemenangan dengan nilai atau score paling tinggi.

Nah itu beberapa uraian menarik terkait kelebihan yang dipunyai oleh suatu situs slot online. Yang di mana saat ini sedang banyak penduduk mengakuinya dan merekomendasikannya ke rekan ataupun saudaranya.

Metode Menang Pragmatic Terbaik? Ini Cara Yang Benar!

Sejumlah Cara Menang agen slot online Yang Prima Ini

Pragmatic dan permainan yang ada

Hal yang perlu Anda melakukan lebih dahulu buat mendapat kemenangan di permainan ini yakni permainan yang ada. Mencermati permainan yang Anda putuskan buat memperoleh kemenangan ini yakni soal yang paling pas. Dengan menunjuk permainan yang udah Anda kuasai, jadi menang tidak jadi perihal susah. Masalah ini timbul karena Anda mengerti soal yang penting Anda kerjakan waktu kondisi tak tersangka. Aplikasikan sisi ini, ya!

Fokus dalam permainan

Kali ini, buat menjadi pemenang permainan pragmatic yang mesti Anda kerjakan ialah sisi yang lebih simple. Bahkan juga, tiada penting Anda layih, kami yakini Anda bisa lakukan sisi ini dengan prima. Hal yang kami tujuan untuk Anda kerjakan ini yakni focus di permainan yang ada. Jangan pernah meleng serta mengalami lawan ketahui kekurangan Anda. Kebalikannya, melakukan masalah ini di musuh Anda dan menangi permainan ini.

Taruhan terbatas di permainan

Bagian yang penting Anda simak kesempatan ini buat mendapat kesempatan kemenangan yang makin besar yakni taruhan dengan nominal yang sudah Anda awasi. Yakini Anda tidak keluarkan seluruhnya modal yang ada secara sekalian yakni soal yang prima. Kerjakan masalah ini dan mendapatkan kekalahan terang akan sebabkan Anda jadi rugi dalam nominal yang begitu besar . Maka, yakini buat batasi taruhan dalam tiap-tiap session permainan ini.

Semua sisi yang ada awalnya sebagai selangkah yang dapat menuntjn Anda mendapat kemenangan di permainan pragmatic ini. Walau tidak seringkali menang, kami yakini frekwensi kekalahan Anda perlahan-lahan bakal menyusut. Perihal ini terang jadi sisi yang Anda inginkan. Jadi sebab itu, aplikasikan soal ini serta buktikanlah sendiri. Kami menegaskan Anda dapat mendapati beberapa keuntungan serta kehebohan waktu meningkatkan soal ini.

Bingo and Raffles: Nonprofits and Games of Chance

This article is reprinted with permission from the FEBRUARY 1998 issue of the New Jersey Lawyer.

Community groups, organizations, service groups and churches engage in various fund raising activities every day, from car washes and bake sales to bingo and raffles. Football pools, lotteries and other forms of gambling also occur every day. in representing nonprofits, it is important to know what types of fund-raising activities the organization can engage in without violating the laws of this state.

New Jersey allows certain types of gaming by specific types of nonprofit organizations. There are detailed licensing procedures, however, that must be followed, as well as significant restrictions on how the proceeds derived from permitted games of chance may be used. A large number of nonprofits that would qualify to conduct games of chance are unaware of the licensing requirements imposed by law and the significant penalties that may be assessed for conducting such gaming without a license.

A majority of gaming by nonprofits is conducted in the form of bingo and raffles. Accordingly, this article focuses specifically on gaming under the Bingo Licensing Law¹ and the Raffles Licensing Law²(together referred to as bingo and raffles licensing laws), and the corresponding regulations established under them.³

The Licensing Process

The bingo and raffles licensing laws provide a dual licensing mechanism, in which the municipality where the gaming will be conducted ultimately issues the license to the qualified, fund-raising organization. Thus, the location in which the gaming activity is conducted is extremely important, because the particular municipality determines whether the gaming will be permitted. the bingo and raffles licensing laws operate only in those municipalities where they have been specifically adopted by public referendum.

Organizations desiring to be licensed to conduct bingo or raffles must begin with the Legalized Games of Chance Control Commission, established under the Department of Law and Public Safety to administer the bingo and raffles licensing laws.⁴in order for an organization to apply for a municipal license, it first must register with and obtain an “identification number” from the commission.

In order to register, the organization must submit a completed application, including a non-refundable, biennial registration fee of $50,⁵ a copy of its bylaws and constitution; a detailed financial summary indicating its sources of income, expenditures and the purposes for which such expenditures were made for the preceding one-year period; a list of the names, addresses and ages of each member of its organization; and, if incorporated, a copy of its articles of incorporation filed with the secretary of state.⁶ the commission then will analyze whether the organization is a “qualified” nonprofit organization, as discussed below.

Qualified Organizations

Not all nonprofit organizations are qualified to conduct games of chance pursuant to the bingo and raffles licensing laws. Qualified organizations include bona fide organizations or associations of veterans of any war in which the United States has been engaged, churches or religious congregations and religious organizations, charitable, educational and fraternal organizations, civic and service clubs, senior citizen associations and clubs, officially recognized volunteer fire companies, and officially recognized volunteer first aid or rescue squads.⁷

If the commission determines that an organization falls within one of the enumerated categories, it will review the following:

1. If the organization is incorporated, whether it is incorporated in New Jersey as a religious corporation or an association not-for-pecuniary profit, and is empowered by its articles of incorporation to further one or more of the authorized purposes defined by the regulations.

2. If it is not incorporated, whether it is organized in New Jersey as a religious or other organization not-for-pecuniary profit, and is authorized by its written constitution, charter or bylaws to further one or more of the authorized purposes.

3. Whether the organization is comprised of a membership of not less than 25 persons.

4. Whether it has been engaged in the business of furthering an authorized purpose for at least a one-year period preceding application.

5. Whether it relies primarily on funds from sources other than the conduct of games of chance for furthering its authorized purpose.⁸

If the applicant meets these criteria, the commission will issue the organization an identification number, which is valid for two years, allowing it to apply to a municipality for a license to conduct gaming.

There is no requirement in the bingo and raffles licensing laws or the regulations that the organization be a corporation which is exempt from taxation pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in order to be issued an identification number. Additionally, the term “membership” is not defined by the regulations, nor is there any mechanism to obtain a waiver of the 25-member requirement. For these reasons, the commission has been reluctant to issue identification numbers to applicants which are not comprised of at least 25 persons who possess voting power in the corporation or association.

The Municipal License

Neither registration nor the assignment of an identification number entitles a qualified organization to hold or conduct a game of chance. the organization must first obtain the approval of the municipality in which the game of chance is to be held, operated or conducted.

The application filed with the municipality in which the game will be conducted generally requires the same information required by the commission (e.g., bylaws, certificate of incorporation, etc.), together with a detailed description of the gaming to be conducted, including a sample ticket, if it is a raffle. The application also must designate an active member or members of the organization under whom the game of chance will be conducted, including a statement by the member or members that they will be responsible for the conduct of the game in accordance with the bingo and raffles licensing laws and the regulations if a license is granted.

After a complete application is filed, the municipal governing body must investigate the merits of each application and make specific findings, including that the applicant is a qualified organization and that the designated member or members are bona fide members of the organization, of good moral character and never convicted of a crime.⁹ If the municipal governing board makes the requisite findings with respect to an application for a gaming license, the board must adopt a resolution authorizing issuance of the license.¹⁰ the license shall be valid for a period of no more than one year from the date of issuance.

Conducting Bingo and Raffles

The regulations governing the conduct of bingo and raffles under the bingo and raffles licensing laws are quite comprehensive. Detailed below are some fundamental requirements for conducting bingo or raffles of which licensees should be aware.

The licensee must designate a specific representative who will be responsible for insuring that all gaming is conducted in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations. Only bona fide members of the organization may operate the game, and no person can be paid for conducting or assisting in conducting the game. Proceeds derived from gaming operations may be used only to further the organization’s authorized purpose. Further, supplies necessary to the gaming operation may be purchased or leased only from vendors approved by the commission.

The bingo and raffles licensing laws also limit the prizes that may be awarded in the aggregate and in any one particular game. Specifically, no licensee may offer a prize having a retail value greater than $100,000 in any one raffle conducted by drawing, or $500 in any raffle not conducted by drawing. Further, no licensee shall offer prizes that, in the aggregate, amount to a value greater than $500,000 in any 12-month period. Finally, all tickets or rights to participate in a raffle must be sold at a uniform unit price, and discounts for the purchase of more than one ticket are prohibited.¹¹

As for bingo games, no prize may be offered exceeding $250 in one particular game, nor may prizes exceeding $1,000 in the aggregate for one occasion be offered.¹² And, as in the case of raffles, all cards must be sold at a uniform unit price, with no discounts allowed for additional purchases. Moreover, as for the premises and equipment used for bingo, unless the licensee is the sole owner, or it is donated, the person leasing the premises and equipment, and the price for same, must be approved by the commission.

Report of Operations

No later than the 15th day of the calendar month following the month in which a game of chance is conducted, the organization conducting the game and the member or members responsible for the conduct of the game must file a report of operation with the commission.¹³ The report must include the gross receipts derived from each game; the expenses incurred and to whom such amounts were paid; the net profit from each game; the uses to which the net profit has been or will be applied; and a list of the prizes offered or given and the respective values of each.

Fines and Penalties

A violation of the bingo and raffles licensing laws or the regulations carries a fine of up to $7,500 for a first offense and up to $15,000 for the second and each subsequent offense. in addition, the commission is authorized to order restitution to an aggrieved party.¹⁴ All penalties may be collected in a summary manner pursuant to the Penalty Enforcement Act.¹⁵

Conclusion

New Jersey nonprofit organizations can successfully raise funds through bingo or raffles. However, if the organization does not adhere to the bingo and raffles licensing laws or the regulations, the penalty may wipe out any profits realized. Care should be taken, therefore, to understand and comply with all applicable laws and regulations.

Endnotes

1. N.J.S.A. 5:8-24 et seq.

2. N.J.S.A. 5:8-50 et seq.

3. N.J.A.C. 13:47-1.1 et seq.

4. N.J.S.A. 5:8-1.

5. A senior citizen association or club requesting registration is exempt from the biennial registration fee. N.J.A.C. 13:47-2.3(b).

6. N.J.A.C. 13:47-2.3(a).

7. N.J.S.A. 5:8-25 and 51.

8. An “authorized purpose” is an educational, charitable, patriotic, religious or public-spirited purpose, defined to be a purpose benefiting an indefinite number of persons, either by bringing their minds or hearts under the influence of education or religion, by relieving their bodies from disease, suffering or constraint, by assisting them to establish themselves in life, or by erecting or maintaining public buildings or works, or otherwise lessening the burden of government, or in the case of a senior citizen association or club, the support of such organization. An authorized purpose does not include the erection, acquisition, improvement, maintenance or repair of property, real, personal or mixed, unless such property is and shall be used exclusively for one or more of the purposes stated above. N.J.A.C. 13:47-1.1.

9. N.J.S.A. 5:8-27 and 53.

10. Id.

11. N.J.A.C. 13:47-8.3. Note that these limits do not apply to on-premises raffles or where all of the prizes are wholly donated.

12. N.J.A.C. 13.47-7.2. Progressive jackpot bingo and 50/50 bingo games are not subject to this limitation.

13. N.J.S.A. 5:8-37 and 64.

14. These penalty provisions do not apply to violations committed by organizations that hold a valid license at the time the offense is allegedly committed.

15. N.J.S.A. 2A:58-1 et seq.

Tips on Keeping Your Information Safe and Out of the Hands of Identity Thieves

Personal Identity Theft

It seems like hackers are getting better at stealing your personal information. So how can you outsmart them? One important tip is to constantly change your passwords in order to protect your online security. Do not use the same password for more than one or two sites. If you have several accounts, use different passwords and change them at least once a month, especially for accounts that involve financial and credit card information. Never give your password out to anyone over the phone or via email.

Creating strong passwords are the best defense against identity thieves. Experts advise creating unique passwords and store them in a safe place. Using symbols and numbers or making up words are another way to ensure that your passwords are more difficult to crack. Put a crazy sentence all together like “I like peanut butter better than jelly could be Ilpbbtj and then add a number of symbol.

While it is impossible to ensure that your passwords won’t be stolen, making them more difficult is a step in the right direction. Also, monitor your credit report and financial records on a frequent basis can help minimize the damage if someone does get your password. Companies which store your personal information and passwords are also responsible for securing the information because they use corporate security and/or law enforcement to help keep your information secure.

If you are a victim of identity theft, contact the credit bureaus, your financial institution and law enforcement.

Corporate Intellectual Property Theft

It’s not just individuals that need to be concerned about sensitive information. Corporate intellectual property theft is a big concern for corporations. Competitors, criminals, and others inside and outside the corporation, and even governments who want your intellectual property secrets. Many times victims are not even aware that information has been stolen. Intellectual property theft has serious effects on national industries and even a country’s economic and political environment.

Today many Western governments along with the United States have banded together with an international law enforcement network, although thy have had limited success with ending the problem with China and Russia where much of the intellectual property theft has originated from. Industry must take matters into their own hands as well to secure their computer systems and governments must assist in making sure that the Internet is secure.