Life In 19x19

Judicata, you're our only hope!!! Where are you? We need your wisdom!

(but barring the appearance of such a hero, jts sounds on target)

jts wrote:... Not all property is held free and clear; sometimes it is held conditionally. For example, bequests to universities are generally earmarked for a specific purpose and are forfeited to the estate, or to some specified third party, if they are diverted to another purpose. I assume that is what is at issue here. Also, the asset of a legal person is not the personal property of an executive or a board of directors, and I believe other interested parties can bring suit for a number of reasons.

I understand that is almost, but not quite the issue here. The Nihon Ki-in is not, TTBOMK, diverting money from the Seattle go center to buy pizza and sake. If so, then, yes, they would almost certainly be in violation of the implied conditions of Iwamoto's bequest.
It appears that they are running short of money for such projects, and have to make a choice of which of Iwamoto's projects they wish to fund. It further appears that they have chosen NY over Seattle. The result is still well within the bounds of Iwamoto's wishes.
If my understanding as expressed above is correct, then the lawsuit hasn't the chances of a mushy snowball - unless someone could prove that Iwamoto prefered Seattle over NY.

To continue with JTS's university analogy: suppose a bequest funds a research team of four people in a university, and then the trust that funds it starts running short of money. If the managers of the bequest then lay off one of the researchers to balance their budget, then if he sues, he hasn't a leg to stand on.

That makes sense too Joaz, but might not mean that Seattle can't sue, only that the Nihon Ki-In has a strong potential defense.

Also interesting is that it is very likely that there's no real plan to reopen the NY centre - apparently that centre was... less than successful.

Okay, but let's say that the Broadener family donates money both to endow a chaired professorship in Lifeboat Studies, and also to found a library to hold Barry Broadener's prized collection of early modern cookbooks; and they make both donations through Hartford University, with the caveat that either bequest goes back to the family if it is no longer being used for its intended purpose.

What happens when the President of the university goes down to Atlantic City and bets the entire endowment for the Broadener Professor of Lifeboat Studies on red? Can the President then auction off some of the famous cookbooks that were part of the other bequest to avoid running out of money for the first bequest? He could certainly try, and in some countries where mortmain is illegal he might succeed, but in the USA I think the Broadener family could successfully sue to prevent the sale and have the entire bequest returned to the family.

Even if both the Seattle and NY Go Centers are projects of the Kiin, Joaz, that doesn't mean that the board is equally free to spend money on either of them. You might think about the situation to firms that are nearing bankruptcy. Just because they have to make hard choices between responsibilities to bond holders, suppliers, pension funds, unions, and customers doesn't mean that the board is legally entitled to give the money to whomever they choose.

IANAL, btw. I just spend more time than I should thinking about mortmain.

illluck wrote:Also interesting is that it is very likely that there's no real plan to reopen the NY centre - apparently that centre was... less than successful.

This was partially due to the Kiin itself. They stubbornly refused to allow the building to be partially renovated in order to allow us to rent out the top floors; something that would have made the center more than self-sufficient.

My guess is that legally there's not much that the SGC can do, but I think the recent actions of the Kiin have been wrong and have directly gone against Iwamoto's wishes. The SGC was able to break even, so it was not a drain to the Kiin in any way. They claim that they want to route the funds to the NYGC, but these funds were never needed, the aforementioned renovation was not a very inexpensive investment and would have generated a profit. The Kiin has shown again and again that international spreading of go is not their priority, even if that means going against the wishes of someone who donated money specifically for that purpose.

As someone who played for years at both the Seattle Go Center and the New York Go Center, I am sad to see them both suffer recently. I don't know legally who is on more solid ground, and I don't know the financial realities facing the Nihon-Kiin. Most of us at this point are just speculating from afar.

I am just afraid of the endgame. The potential benefits of winning a lawsuit are localized (benefitting primarily the Seattle area). The potential costs of an ugly legal battle with lots of resources spent, regardless of legal outcome, could impact US-Japan Go relations going forward. Or am I overstating the negative?

mhlepore wrote:I am just afraid of the endgame. The potential benefits of winning a lawsuit are localized (benefitting primarily the Seattle area). The potential costs of an ugly legal battle with lots of resources spent, regardless of legal outcome, could impact US-Japan Go relations going forward. Or am I overstating the negative?

No, I agree. Even if the NHK was behaving poorly, this seems like a selfish move by the SGC.

mhlepore wrote:As someone who played for years at both the Seattle Go Center and the New York Go Center

What are the average numbers of players per go playing day? How many days per week?

speedchase wrote:

mhlepore wrote:I am just afraid of the endgame. The potential benefits of winning a lawsuit are localized (benefitting primarily the Seattle area). The potential costs of an ugly legal battle with lots of resources spent, regardless of legal outcome, could impact US-Japan Go relations going forward. Or am I overstating the negative?

No, I agree. Even if the NHK was behaving poorly, this seems like a selfish move by the SGC.

The SGC is a unique location in this country, it's taken years to build. Even if the economy improved and the center could later be reopened, it could take years for it to return to its same status.

I don't think it's selfish to fight for something like this.

And to be fair, US-Japan relations are less vital right now than US-Korea relations. Japan is no longer the only game in town.

RobertJasiek wrote:

mhlepore wrote:As someone who played for years at both the Seattle Go Center and the New York Go Center

What are the average numbers of players per go playing day? How many days per week?

I played in NY more than a decade ago. Seattle was 2002-2004. So keeping in mind that my experiences are dated, Seattle seemed to have more regulars attending and more formal events, but I can't put a number on it. Both I believe were closed one day a week. NYGC had an entire townhouse in prime space of mid-town Manhattan and there seemed to be a larger contingent of Japanese players there than in Seattle. I enjoyed both.

speedchase wrote:

mhlepore wrote:I am just afraid of the endgame. The potential benefits of winning a lawsuit are localized (benefitting primarily the Seattle area). The potential costs of an ugly legal battle with lots of resources spent, regardless of legal outcome, could impact US-Japan Go relations going forward. Or am I overstating the negative?

No, I agree. Even if the NHK was behaving poorly, this seems like a selfish move by the SGC.

And the rest. The US isn't the whole world. The NHK had reached out trying to promote Go all over the world. I don't sue my family and I don't sue my friends, unless I don't want them as friends anymore. The only people who gain from legal action are lawyers with your money. I doubt that Japanese people sue their friends either. It will make them think who their friends are, who they want to be involved with. That is no 'win' for anyone.

PeterHB wrote:

speedchase wrote:

mhlepore wrote:I am just afraid of the endgame. The potential benefits of winning a lawsuit are localized (benefitting primarily the Seattle area). The potential costs of an ugly legal battle with lots of resources spent, regardless of legal outcome, could impact US-Japan Go relations going forward. Or am I overstating the negative?

No, I agree. Even if the NHK was behaving poorly, this seems like a selfish move by the SGC.

And the rest. The US isn't the whole world. The NHK had reached out trying to promote Go all over the world. I don't sue my family and I don't sue my friends, unless I don't want them as friends anymore. The only people who gain from legal action are lawyers with your money. I doubt that Japanese people sue their friends either. It will make them think who their friends are, who they want to be involved with. That is no 'win' for anyone.

By the same token, friends don't evict friends from their homes. So while I understand your general attitude - that if you flatter the Nihon Kiin that their actions are always noble and just, perhaps they will remember your obeisance if they ever again feel the need to promote Go elsewhere in the world - I can also understand why the Seattle community does not see the Kiin's actions as the actions of a friend.

jts wrote:- that if you flatter the Nihon Kiin that their actions are always noble and just, perhaps they will remember your obeisance if they ever again feel the need to promote Go elsewhere in the world -

Just for clarity, the above statement by jts does not represent my view. Nearly the opposite represents my view. Shows the danger of believing you are summarizing someone's view. Considering I have been quite the opposite of silent on my views, it might be easier to let people read them and form their own opinion of my views.

I think jts is expanding on your metaphor with family and friends. The fact that you don't agree suggests that the metaphor is not an apt one.