RE: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt
orga...Cassidy,
May I add my thoughts here. Whether or not something is strictly legal or
illegal is not the same as what is ethical or what adds credibility or leads to
trust. I think you got confused in your
In a message dated 6/3/2007 5:38:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Again, I'm not a lawyer but it strikes me that many organizations, the
Catholic Church, for example, which is also tax exempt and has had, for years,
very closed door "internal investigations" and hasn
Again, I'm not a lawyer but it strikes me that many organizations, the Catholic
Church, for example, which is also tax exempt and has had, for years, very
closed door "internal investigations" and hasn't been stripped of their 501
status. So, I may be off base and I'll stand correction from som
In a message dated 6/3/2007 10:06:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know what typically happens when a company launches an internal
investigation
That's the point you just said you didn't make. This isn't a "company." It
is obligated to operate in the open b
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
> their listserv liaison and research coordinator, Melani,
I think you mis-read their statement. Lewis said very clearly that their
liaison was Lori Brenner and that all questions should go to her, NOT Melani.
>I won't ha
this is probably better suited for one of the lawyers on the list -- I don't
know what typically happens when a company launches an internal investigation.
Do they issue press releases? Do they simply decline to comment until the
investigation is over? Does a spokes-person make periodic updates
I wouldn't wait much longer for the investigation results or
help from our friend Melani.
Glenn
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information rel
In a message dated 6/3/2007 9:22:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
at least until john fenton's suspension is over.
That's a reasonable point -- but how will we know. Hasn't it been more than
the two weeks mentioned in the announcement? And, given the right of the
>Anyway, how long do you think it would be right to wait for an answer from UCD
>before concluding they were >stonewalling?
at least until john fenton's suspension is over.
In a message dated 6/2/2007 8:20:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If someone wants to file a lawsuit before then, I'd say knock yourself out,
but it seems like a lot of wasted effort
Apparently, you wrote this "lawsuit" thing without bothering to read the
reference
10 matches
Mail list logo
