Lawsuits from Assoc. Members

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ASA/NYSSOBLUE

and also added to our constitution a bylaw expelling any member who sued the group.

You might want to check with a lawyer (not the crummy one, someone else). I don't believe such a statute is legal. If your group has done something wrong (hypothetically), a member cannot be threatened with expulsion for suing to rectify it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

Although I agree our society is way too litigious, there is still a need for civil lawsuits. An association that expels its members for exercising a constitutional right is troubling to me. Does not this trouble you or any of your members? Why have this bylaw? Assume a black official is prevented from calling varsity ball just because of his race and assume there is a paper trail (emails) that can prove this. Are you telling me you will expel him from your association if he brings a lawsuit against the association? You are basically telling your group, don't blow the whistle on us or you will be expelled. I understand wanting to prevent frivolous lawsuits, but this is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You might want to check with a lawyer (not the crummy one, someone else). I don't believe such a statute is legal. If your group has done something wrong (hypothetically), a member cannot be threatened with expulsion for suing to rectify it.

Perhaps (???) the actual wording in the bylaws only expels the person if the ruling went against them.

There are also contracts everywhere wherein a person gives up their right to sue...so this really isn't that far out there. A person doesn't have to join the organization if they don't like the Bylaws.

A lot of associations are also just small collections of people trying to cover games for the schools in their area. They're not getting rich off of it. Even just one frivolous lawsuit would destroy them and hurt everyone in the community.

Some people just like to be a pain in the neck and make stuff up in their own minds. I can see this as a way to filter out those while no real issue would be blocked by this. The courts, in a valid complaint, would likely also rule that this clause was invalid or not applicable.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

...
There are also contracts everywhere wherein a person gives up their right to sue...so this really isn't that far out there. A person doesn't have to join the organization if they don't like the Bylaws.

...

Organizations also have stipulations that are not enforceable legally, no matter that they are written into a contract.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Organizations also have stipulations that are not enforceable legally.

A few years ago my local board tried to forbid members from officiating AAU games, in the off season, that were not assigned by our local assignment commissioner. A few members, and a few local AAU organizations, started throwing around words like "independent contractor", and "restraint of trade", which very quickly ended that short-lived experiment.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Organizations also have stipulations that are not enforceable legally, no matter that they are written into a contract.

Yet, they can discourage certain actions even if not legally enforceable.

I don't think, however, that it would be unenforceable for a private membership organization to exclude someone who was disruptive to there purpose from membership...as long as that exclusion isn't itself unconstitutional.

And suing just because you didn't like your schedule (without a discrimination claim behind it) would be disruptive (costly) to the organization. If there was discrimination behind it, then, if it were found to be a valid complaint, the exclusion based on being sued would probably be ruled invalid. However, it there were no discrimination found, then the exclusion may be left to stand.