United Cancer Council, Inc. - Page 80

                                       - 64 -                                         
               In addition, investigative inquiries with respect to                   
          petitioner’s direct-mail fundraising activities were begun by               
          various State attorneys general, including the attorneys general            
          for Alabama, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and               
          Pennsylvania.  Later, lawsuits were begun by some of the State              
          attorneys general, including the attorneys general for New York             
          and Pennsylvania.                                                           
          G. Petitioner’s Escrow Account-Related Problems                             
               1. Draws and Petitioner’s Dispute With W&H Over the                    
          Calculation of Cumulative Net Mailing Campaign Revenue                      
               Pursuant to its draw arrangement with W&H, petitioner                  
          received monthly draws from the Escrow Account maintained by WIB.           
          See supra table 6 & preceding text.  In late 1984 these draws               
          were $5,000 per month.  W&H exercised final authority with                  
          respect to approving and directing WIB to release the funds                 
          petitioner sought.  Even though the Escrow Account was in                   
          petitioner’s name and WIB considered that the funds in the Escrow           
          Account belonged to petitioner, WIB paid money out of the Escrow            
          Account only in response to check requests submitted by W&H.                
          This was so whether the payments were (1) to vendors in                     
          connection with petitioner’s fundraising activities (in which               
          events WIB also required the vendors’ invoices), (2) to W&H, or             
          (3) directly to petitioner.                                                 
               Petitioner could not have obtained immediate possession of             
          the funds that WIB held in the Escrow Account by unilaterally               





Page:  Previous  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011