New York’s Non-Profit Revitalization Act
By Jerald A Jacobs, Julia E Judish and Dawn K Crowell
The New York Non-Profit Revitalization Act of 2013 was signed into law on 18 December 2013 and the bulk of its provisions will take effect on 1 July 2014. The goals of this legislative effort were to modernise the law and reduce administrative burdens on non-profits, as well as to improve governance accountability and oversight.
The following governance features of the act apply to all non-profits incorporated in New York.
Conflict of Interest Policy: a conflict-of-interest policy is now mandatory and must include the following: a definition of conflicts; procedures for disclosure to an audit committee or, if no audit committee exists, to the board; a requirement that any conflicted person be recused from deliberations and voting on the subject; prohibition against the conflicted person attempting to improperly influence deliberations or voting on the subject; documentation of conflicts situations, including in minutes of any meetings where discussed; special procedures for disclosing and handling related-party transactions; written disclosure of potential conflicts, including involvement with any entity with which the corporation has a relationship and interest in any transaction in which the corporation is a participant, by all directors prior to election and annually thereafter; and written disclosures are to be submitted to the secretary, who must provide copies to the chair of the audit committee or, if none exists, the chair of the board…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Pillsbury briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
California courts are clarifying potential liability under the CMIA of healthcare providers, health plans, pharmaceutical companies and others for the unauthorised disclosure of medical information.
The California Supreme Court in Iskanian v CLS Transportation Los Angeles held that its decision in Gentry v Superior Court is no longer good law.