- 3 -
that prohibits students from engaging in interracial dating and
marriage, and the Supreme Court found that policy to be contrary
to public policy.
Petitioner's charter states that petitioner was organized
for the following reasons:
To operate a museum and art gallery which will be open
to the public with the hope that it will contribute
substantially to the need of the Southeastern United
States for cultural and artistic opportunities akin to
that of other regions long recognized for their
outstanding art galleries which enrich the lives of
their people.
To solicit, collect, receive, accumulate, administer
and disburse funds and property in such a manner as
will, in the sole discretion of the board of directors,
most effectively operate to further religious,
charitable, scientific, literary, or educational
purposes, either directly or by contributions to any
organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code, with the exception of
organizations testing for public safety.
In essence, petitioner is taking over all of the operations
of the museum previously managed by the University. At the
outset, the museum operated by petitioner will display the same
artwork, retain the same employees, and be housed in the same
building (the Building) as the museum operated by the University.
Unlike the University, however, petitioner does not prohibit
interracial dating or marriage.
Petitioner and the University entered into a 3-year lease
agreement beginning January 1, 1993, under which petitioner is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011