Hacker News Reader

Comment by netaustin | Hacker News Reader

I clicked on this article since I know of a good example of a donor making things complicated and half-expected to see it here. When I rented my current NYC apartment in 2012, I googled my landlord, a man named Paul Bogoni, and found this atop the search results: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/appellate-division-fir...

The cases in the article don't quite approach this magnitude of conflict — what do you do when a donor defaults on a pledge? What do you do when a donor sues you because they're unhappy with how you spent their money?

View on HN

>> what do you do when a donor defaults on a pledge? What do you do when a donor sues you because they're unhappy with how you spent their money?

Talk to a lawyer. Sometimes pledges are just empty promises. Sometimes they are actually contracts. The former can be ignored. The later must be handled by legal professionals.

Examples:

I promise to give you $100 = nothing. I promise to match donations up to $100 = contract. I promise to leave you $100 in my will = nothing. Let my kid hang a painting in your gallery and get $100 in my will = contract.

The use of famous names can be tricky irrespective of whether they once donated or not. "The Micheal Jackson school of dance" ... expect lawyers. "The Trump memorial outhouse" = free speech ... also expect lawyers but feel good that you are in the right.

> I promise to match donations up to $100 = contract.

Hm? Where's the consideration for me? Doesn't a contract require consideration on both sides?

You have to engage in whatever fundraising efforts are necessary to obtain the first $100.

In this case, we both value progress in the philanthropic endeavor, so we make a contract: "if you generate $100 of investment in the endeavor for me, then I will invest $100 in the endeavor for you."

I am pretty confident such a contract would be legally defective and unenforceable in those terms. You raising money for yourself is not consideration that I receive, regardless of whether I think it's a good thing.

IANAL, but Promissory Estoppel might apply here?

The contract is also between the donor and other donors that give on the belief that thier donations will be matched. Because of the promise (offer) they do something they otherwise would do (consideration). And they accept by giving the money.

Reliance has been used to enforce pledges

Reply on news.ycombinator.com