Comment by lusr | Hacker News Reader

Comment by lusr | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This seemed like an interesting story so I dug into it a bit more because the notion of a for-profit charity organization was unfamiliar to me.

But detailed information seems very scarce. The article states Avon were sued for breach of contract - but mentions no damages, despite an apparently successful claim. This seems very strange - clearly the founder was passionate about his cause, so why not take whatever penalties were paid out and use them to restart the cause?

From reading the Pallotta Teamworks (PTW) site (http://www.pallottateamworks.com/about_pallotta4.php), one can infer there was apparently an arbitration (IANAL, how do you go from "suing" to "arbitration"? I thought suing can only happen after arbitration but there's no mention of a lawsuit...) but even on that site there is absolutely zero indication of PTW receiving anything despite "winning". This story just doesn't add up.

KomenWatch, which seems rather biased, but still adds another angle to the story, suggest that Avon severed ties with PTW because of growing criticism (http://komenwatch.org/history-politics/avon-3-day/).

Anybody have a reference to a more objective discussion of these events?

http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?Fe...

"Avon Products Foundation, Inc. (the “Foundation”) has been a defendant in an arbitration proceeding brought by Pallotta TeamWorks (“Pallotta”) in September 2002, before Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. Pallotta asserted claims arising out of the Foundation’s decision to use another party to conduct breast cancer fundraising events. In July 2005 the arbitrator issued a Partial Final Award in this matter, awarding Pallotta $3.0 [million ] in net damages, after an offset for Foundation counterclaims. The arbitrator also instructed the parties to reach agreement on three outstanding issues: (i) pre-award interest; (ii) costs and attorney’s fees; and (iii) possible liabilities under Pallotta lease agreements. In October 2005 the Foundation entered into a settlement with Pallotta and paid Pallotta $7.5 [million] in exchange for a release of Pallotta’s claims. The Foundation is a registered 501(c)(3) charity and is a distinct entity from Avon Products, Inc., which has not been a party to these proceedings. The Company has not determined whether to make a contribution to the Foundation to cover all or part of the settlement.

I thought suing can only happen after arbitration but there's no mention of a lawsuit...) but even on that site there is absolutely zero indication of PTW receiving anything despite "winning". This story just doesn't add up.

Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism for lawsuits - it replaces a court trial. Its particularly used frequently in contract disputes. (Sometimes taking a case to arbitration as opposed to court is dictated in the initial contract).

http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/AIDS-Ride-firm-closes-i... hints a bit more controversy than apparent in the OP.

Arbitration can occur at any time during a dispute/lawsuit, sometimes ordered by a judge, or agreed to by the parties in their own settlement negotiations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com