Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
ANDREW M. CUOMO,
Plaintiff, COMPLAINT
- against
Defendants.
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, on behalf of the
People of the State of New York, alleges the following against United Homeless
President and Director ofUHO ("Riley"), and Myra Walker, Secretary and Director of
1. Each day on the streets of New York City, URO table workers convince
sYmpathetic passersby to deposit cash into plastic jugs under the false pretense that their
hard-earned money is going to a bona fide charity that funds services for the homeless.
URO is a sham. All of the money dropped into the URO jugs is pocketed by the URO
table workers, Riley, Walker, and other insiders, or is used by Riley and Walker to
perpetuate a scheme to defraud the public. Riley and Walker run URO in total disregard
of the legal and fiduciary requirements that bona fide charitable corporations must
follow, resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars of charitable assets being
and describes UHO table wotkers as "members" ofUHO. Donning UHO-branded hats,
identification badges, aprons, and other paraphernalia, UHO table workers mislead the
public that donated funds will be used for services for the homeless.
3. The table workers pay Riley and Walker a fixed "fee" for the right to use
the UHO materials and keep the daily cash donations in excess of the fee, even though
4. Although assets ofUHO, Riley and Walker treat the "fees" as their
personal kitty, dipping into them whenever they choose. In effect, Riley and Walker
have co-opted a tax-exempt, charitable corporate structure for their own personal benefit.
5. In order to induce cash donations from the public, the table workers make
exaggerated, false, and misleading statements to the public about the "services" UHO
provides, including that funds go to provide food and clothing, are given to "charities and
different churches," and support "pantries," "shelter," and "detox centers." However,
functioning board to oversee their actions. Riley and Walker are the only directors on
UHO's board. UHO has not held an election for directors since its incorporation in 1993.
Left unchecked, Riley and Walker routinely flout the requirements applicable to not-for
profit corporations. In violation of their fiduciary duties, Riley and Walker continuously
disregard laws on charitable solicitation and prohibitions against profit sharing and
-2
private inurement. Riley and Walker improperly distribute UHO cash to themselves,
7. Riley and Walker fail to maintain procedures to account for UHO's total
revenues and expenses, fail to maintain financial controls, and fail to keep accurate books
and records as required by law. Riley and Walker simply ignore the legal and
8. The Attorney General seeks a judgment, among other things: (a) enjoining
UHO, Riley and Walker from soliciting charitable contributions from the public; (b)
enjoining Riley and Walker from accessing, using, or distributing UHO assets; (c)
holding Riley and Walker liable for their misappropriation and waste ofUHO assets; (d)
removing Riley and Walker as officers and directors ofUHO; (e) enjoining Riley and
Walker from serving as.an officer or director ofUHO or any other not-for-profit
corporation in the future; (f) dissolving UHO; and (g) granting such other and further
PARTIES
York not-for-profit corporations and the conduct of their officers and directors, in
Powers & Trusts Law ("EPTL"), and Executive Law ("Exec. L.").
10. The Attorney General maintains offices at 120 Broadway, New York,
New York.
-3
11. Defendant URO is incorporated in New York as a Type B (charitable),
not-for-profit corporation under § 402 of the N-PCL. Its principal office is 2160 Clinton
12. UHO is registered with the New York State Attorney General's Charities
Bureau. It files annual financial reports with the Charities Bureau, including the IRS
Form 990 and the New York CHAR 500. UHO's certificate of incorporation states that
13. UHO is exempt from federal income tax under § 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code. Its certificate of incorporation requires URO to operate in a manner that
14. Defendant Stephen Riley resides at 2160 Clinton Avenue, #5K, Bronx,
New York 10457. Riley is a co-founder ofURO. Riley has served continuously as
UHO's president and a member of its board of directors since UHO's incorporation in
1993.
15. Defendant Myra Walker resides at 3511 Putnam Place, #5D, Bronx, New
York 10467. Walker has served as a member of UHO's board of directors since 1993.
She also serves as its secretary and is involved in UHO's day-to-day operations.
- 4
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
16. The Attorney General brings this action on behalf of the People of the
State of New York under Article 7-A of the Executive Law, § 175, N-PCL §§ 112,706,
action based on violations of Article 7-A of the Executive Law to enjoin the fraudulent
solicitation or collection of charitable funds and for an order removing any director or
18. Under N-PCL §§ 720(a) and 720(b), the Attorney General is authorized to
bring an action to require the directors and officers of a New York not-for-profit
corporation to account for the mismanagement of corporate assets and for transfers, loss,
or waste of corporate assets in violation of their fiduciary duties and to recover all
19. Under N-PCL §§ 112(a)(4), 706(d) and 714(c), the Attorney General is
authorized to seek removal of corporate officers and directors for cause, including
20. Under EPTL § 8.1-4(m), the Attorney General nlay institute appropriate
action to dissolve a not-for-profit corporation that has acted beyond its capacity or power,
-5
that has exceeded the authority conferred upon it by law, or has carried on, conducted or
action to enforce any right given under the N-PCL to an officer or director of a not-for
profit corporation. Accordingly, the Attorney General may bring an action for
petition for a judicial dissolution of a corporation where the "directors ... in control of
the corporation have looted or wasted the corporate assets, have perpetuated the
corporation solely for their personal benefit or have otherwise acted in an illegal,
23. The Attorney General also has common law parens patriae authority to
conserve charitable property and to protect the public from fraudulent solicitation.
24. Because the Attorney General maintains offices at 120 Broadway, New
York, New York and Defendants' solicitation of funds is conducted principally in New
York, New York, venue is properly laid in New York County, as provided in CPLR
§ 503(a).
25. Riley created UHO over fifteen years ago to generate cash for his private
26. UHO raises funds by direct, face-to-face solicitations of the public on the
sidewalks of New York City. Passersby are asked to put cash in a plastic jug, which
- 6
27. Seven days a week, URO workers set up tables and URO collection jugs
in prominent outdoor locations around Manhattan, typically in areas with high pedestrian
traffic. Up to 50 tables are set up on Monday through Saturday, with a smaller number
deployed on Sundays. UHO's practice is to have two shifts (morning and afternoon) on
28. In exchange for paYing a fee to Riley, URO workers receive tables and
URO-branded materials, including a tablecloth, apron and plastic jug, and the right to
claim membership in URO and wear a URO name badge. The fee is typically $15 per
29. The funds collected at URO tables are solicited in the nanle ofURO and
30. However, Riley allows the table workers to pocket the donations in excess
31. This arrangement was acknowledged by Riley, Walker, and other URO
representatives in testimony before the Office of the Attorney General ("OAG"). Riley
testified as follows:
A: Yes.
32. For each cluster ofURO tables (such as the Times Square area), at least
one table worker is designated by UHO as a "manager." The manager is responsible for
, collecting the fees at the end of each shift from the other URO workers in his or her area.
The manager is also supposed to pay the shift fee, but the fee may be reduced or waived
-7
if the manager turns over to Riley (or his agents) enough money in fees collected from
others. A manager may even earn a "bonus" if the collected an10unt is high enough.
33. The manager is supposed to record shift fees on a UBO "time and
expense" sheet, which each worker signs. The time and expense sheet does not call for
34. At the end of each day, Riley, Walker and/or Walker's sister, Sheila
Walker, visit each manager to collect the fees, along with the time and expense sheets.
The fees, or some portion thereof, are deposited in UBO's bank account (the "UBO
Account") the following day by Walker or Walker's sister. According to bank records,
Riley is the only authorized user of the URO Account. In practice, Riley has given
. 35. URO's operations do not include any of the following: (a) shelters;
(b) soup kitchens or other food distribution services; (c) services in connection with
distributing clothing, toiletries, or other essential items to the homeless; (d) services to
36. URO does not provide social workers to assist the homeless.
37. URO does not tum over any of the funds it raises from the public to
charities to support the types of services enumerated in the two preceding paragraphs.
38. In soliciting contributions from the public, URO and its workers routinely
make false and misleading statements about how URO uses and distributes the donated
funds.
-8
39. False and misleading statements made by UHO workers to encourage
donations include:
(a) Telling the public that UHO is feeding the honleless, when, in fact,
(b) Stating that "we solicit donations to help keep the pantries running,
and we provide shelter, we have a bunch of detox centers ... we help support
[thenl]," when, in fact, LTHO does not run or support such facilities; and
(c) Claiming that URO and/or Riley distribute the funds collected at
the tables to "charities and different churches," when, in truth, UBO and Riley do
40. URO workers also make false statements regarding their authority to
solicit charitable contributions in public locations. Under the Administrative Code of the
City of New York, § 21-111, a license from the New York City Commissioner of Social
Services is required to solicit money or donations in public places in New York City.
According to Department of Social Services ("DSS") records, URO does not have, nor
41. Nonetheless, URO workers display a document at the tables that they
copy ofUBO's incorporation receipt, a routine document provided by the New York
Department of State at the time of incorporation. The incorporation receipt does not
convey any special privileges for soliciting the public on the sidewalks or anywhere else.
Nor is it a substitute for a public solicitation license from the Commissioner of Social
Services.
-9
42. UHO's published materials, including its website, state that UHO provides
food and clothing to the homeless. For example, UHO's website claims that the tables
function as a "food distribution point" and that UHO workers "distribute clothing."
clothing for the homeless, as Riley and Walker admitted in testimony before the OAG.
UHO's only distribution of food and clothing-is on an ad hoc basis, when members of the
public occasionally drop off such items at a solicitation table, and the table worker
44. UHO's published materials, including its website, also mislead the public
by stating that UHO helps homeless individuals by providing "outreach" at its tables, and
that the tables function as a "community center" that provides support to the homeless
community.
46. UHO's published materials, including its website, misleadingly state that
UBO provides daily "emergency assistance." This description fraudulently creates the
illusion that URO maintains a program of giving cash to individuals based on an analysis
of actual need. In fact, the chief criterion for obtaining such assistance is being a fee
paYing merrlber ofUHO. URO has no policies, procedures or criteria for determining an
"emergency."
47. All funds kept by the table workers receive the "emergency" label-even
though some of the table workers have been regularly receiving that money for years.
- 10
III. Riley and Walker Run UHO Without Any Oversight or Accountability
48. Riley and Walker serve as UHO's only directors, although N-PCL § 702
requires a minimum of three directors. There are no independent directors. URO has not
held any elections for directors since UHO's incorporation in 1993. A third director on
49. In the absence of any board oversight, Riley and Walker are left to their
own devices, with no independent monitoring of their actions. Operating on their own,
Riley and Walker run UHO under their own rules, for their own financial benefit.
50. As directors, Riley and Walker have failed to provide even the most basic
corporate and financial oversight required of fiduciaries. In the last three years alone, the
51. In testimony before the OAG, Riley admitted that the URO board (i.e.,
Riley and Walker) does not spend any time reviewing the IRS Form 99Q--a sworn
- 11
with the IRS and the Attorney General. As alleged below, UHO's Forms 990 have been
IV. Riley and Walker Fail to Properly Record and Report DBO Revenue
and Expenses
52. As UHO's corporate officers, Riley and Walker have not instituted even
the barest rudiments of proper fiscal administration ofUHO's charitable assets. A cash
business, URO has no procedures to ensure that donations and other revenues are
properly recorded, deposited in UHO's bank account, and reported to the OAG. Nor
does it have procedures to ensure that expenses are properly documented and reported to
theOAG.
records, URO has filed materially false and misleading reports with the OAG from 2003
to the present, including the IRS Form 990 and the New York CHAR 500 form. These
sworn fom1s contain materially false and misleading information in that they: (a)
materially underreport UHO's revenues and expenses, for example by not reporting the
hundred of thousands of dollars that URO collects but its workers keep; (b) falsely report
that no compensation was paid to officers and directors (and fail to even identify Walker
as a directe>r), even though Riley and Walker were paid amounts purportedly for services
provided to the organization; (c) disguise payments for personal living expenses paid to
Riley, Walker and other insiders as "emergency cash assistance" or "stipends"; and (d)
A. Revenues
54. With respect to revenues, URO only records shift fees paid by its workers
to use URO tables and solicitation materials. It does not account for its largest source of
- 12
revenue: the hundreds of thousands of dollars donated at the URO tables that are
pocketed by URO workers. l.JBO does not keep records of these donations as revenues
despite the fact the URO workers solicit the funds in the name ofl.JHO while (a) wearing
URO hats and aprons and a URO identification badge, (b) sitting at tables covered with a
URO tablecloth, (c) using cash collection containers emblazoned with the URO logo, and
55. Riley shrugged off any responsibility for properly accounting for DBO's
56. URO conceals the extent of its fundraising activity by keeping no records
of the funds kept by the workers and by excluding those amounts from its filings with the
GAG.
57. DBO maintains a "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding the total sums
collected at its tables. One manager told the OAG that she considered it "none of [her]
business" how much money was collected by those working under her supervision.
58. Thus, the amount of donations is grossly underreported. In the years 2003
through 2007, URO reported revenue ranging from $60,163 to $97,890 on its annual
filings with the OAG. The Attorney General's investigation determined that even a
- 13
conservative estimate would show the amount of donations collected annually at the
tables is at least six times the amount reported. Moreover, the extent ofURO's collection
of donations online and through the mail is unaccounted for, and unknown.
59. Even the amount of fees collected by Riley and Walker and reported as
that even a conservative estimate would show the amount of fees collected annually is at
B. Expenses
60. Just as URO fails to book the public's donations as revenues, URO fails to
document and report as expenses the hundreds of thousands of dollars kept by URO
workers.
documentation to support legitimate business purposes. In 2007 and 2008 alone, nearly
$50,000 in cash expenses lacked documentation explaining the purpose for which URO
living expenses that went to Riley, Walker, and other insiders were misleadingly reported
63. URO's filings with the Attorney General state that Riley receives no
compensation from LiliO. In testimony before the OAG, Riley claimed he received no
compensation.
- 14
64. Riley testified that he receives social security disability checks and
governmental housing assistance, but has no other sources of incon1e. In fact, Riley uses
65. Walker admitted to the OAG that she receives cash compensation from
URO, but claimed the amount is limited to $120 per week, whereas Riley conceded the
figure may in fact be ~ore than $120 per week. In any event, URO does not document'
its paYments to Walker, nor does Walker document her receipt of them.
66. Walker testified that she receives governmental housing assistance, but
has no other sources of income apart from the housing assistance and the $120 weekly
paYments from URO. In fact, Walker uses additional URO funds to supplement her
67. URO also fails to maintain accurate books and records regarding URO
funds paid to vendors and independent contractors, including relatives of Riley. Nor does
68. In early 2009, after being served subpoenas by the OAG demanding
documents concerning UHO's expenses, UHO attempted to paper over its deficient
record-keeping and waste of corporate assets. URO and its accountant took steps to
sanitize expenses previously designated as "stipends" by issuing IRS Forms 1099 for the
years 2005 through 2007, identifYing various individuals who allegedly received
records showing that the individuals identified had received such con1pensation or for
what purpose.
- 15
IV. Riley and Walker Routinely Waste and Misappropriate UHO Assets
69. Although Riley is the only officially authorized user of the URO Account,
in practice, he has given Walker and her sister access to the URO Account, including use
of the ATM/debit card, deposit authority, and online access for electronic transactions.
Riley and Walker routinely draw down the URO Account and other assets for their
personal benefit, as well as for others. As described below, they use LillO funds for day
to-day personal living expenses, such as cable television, groceries, restaurant meals,
thousands of dollars in cash from the URO Account. Over $173,000 in cash was
withdrawn from the account between January 2005 and August 2009.
71. Over $85,000 in cash was withdrawn in 2007 and 2008 alone. URO
records fail to explain how all that cash was used; approximately $50,000, or more than
half the funds withdrawn in those two years, is unaccounted for. Moreover, the limited
purpose.
72. Indeed, URO's limited records show that UHO funds are often used for
personal items wholly unrelated to URO's not-for-profit mission or its office expenses,
including thousands of dollars for: (a) premium cable television services at Riley's home
address; (b) Con Edison utility services provided to Riley's and Walker's home
addresses; (c) groceries and restaurant meals; (d) air, bus, and train travel to destinations
outside New York City, including trips to Riley's hometown of Cleveland, Ohio (even
though Riley acknowledged URO does not conduct any operations outside New York
- 16
City); and (e) a range of other personal purchases, at retailers such as GameStop, HSN
(Home Shopping Network), Bed Bath & Beyond, PC Richards, Ricky's, Toys R Us, The
73. LiliO acquired four vehicles, but Riley transferred ownership of them to
himself. URO pays for all expenses relating to the four vehicles, including insurance,
registration, fuel, parking, tickets, and repairs. These vehicles are used by Riley for
whatever purposes he wants, and Riley has not reimbursed LiliO for any personal use.
74. In addition, Riley has lent one of the URO vehicles to a LiliO vendor, who
provides silkscreening services for URO tablecloths, aprons, and other paraphernalia, for
his full-time personal use, even though he has no legitimate need for full time, all
expenses-paid use of a DHO vehicle. The individual has not reimbursed DHO for his
thousands of dollars to be pocketed each year by the URO workers at the donation tables.
Thousands of dollars in "stipends" have also been distributed to table workers and other
individuals in the form of checks and cash. Like the cash collected at the tables, these
76. Riley has also caused DHO to make payments to certain members of his
family, totaling at least $1,200 in 2008. Defendants have failed to document any services
pecuniary profit and financial gain, and by distributing UHO's cash to insiders, Riley and
- 17
charitable corporations-such as prohibitions on profit-sharing, private benefit and
private inurement. Riley and Walker have thus caused UHO to engage in ultra vires acts
that exceed the authority granted to it by the N-PCL and its certificate of incorporation,
and have jeopardized UHO's tax-exempt status, all in breach of their fiduciary duties.
78. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
under their direction and control, have violated Exec. L. § 172-d(2), in that they have
(a) obtaining money by false pretenses and representations; and (b) soliciting charitable
contributions using materially false and misleading statements about the intended use of
donated funds.
80. UHO, Riley and Walker have violated Exec. L. § 172-d(3), in that they
use and intend to use materially false or misleading advertising or promotional material
in connection with solicitations for charitable purposes, including but not limited to the
81. lillO, Riley and Walker have violated Exec. L. § 172-d(4), in that they
for charitable purposes and the purposes expressed in its registration statenlent.
- 18
82. Accordingly, URO, Riley and Walker should be temporarily and
83. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
84. Riley and Walker have failed to discharge their duties as officers and
directors ofUHO with the degree of care, skill, prudence, diligence, and undivided
loyalty required of them in that, among other things, they have: (a) allowed the diversion
of funds from the UHO Account for the personal use of themselves and others, including
Riley's and Walker's relatives; (b) allowed UHO workers who solicit charitable
contributions for URO to keep hundreds of thousands of dollars ofURO funds for
themselves; (c) failed to establish any system for accurately tracking and accounting for
UHO's revenues and expenses; (d) failed to establish any system of internal controls; (e)
allowed title to four URO vehicles to be transferred to Riley without consideration, while
URO continued to pay all expenses associated with those vehicles; (f) failed to ensure
that UHO's operations adhere to the purposes set forth in its certificate of incorporation;
Internal Revenue Code; and (h) failed to ensure the legal n1inin1um nun1ber of directors to
governURO.
85. By engaging in the foregoing, and upon information and belief, other
improper conduct, Riley and Walker breached their fiduciary duties to URO in violation
- 19
ofN-PCL § 717. Accordingly, Riley and Walker are liable under N-PCL
§§ 720(a)(1)(A) and (a)(l)(B) to account for their conduct in the neglect and violation of
their duties in the management and disposition of corporate assets, and for their conduct
in transferring lTHO assets to themselves and others, and causing loss and waste of 000
86. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
87. Riley has diverted funds from the 000 Account for his personal use. In
addition, Riley has transferred title to four 000 vehicles to himself, while lTHO
continues to pay all expenses associated with those vehicles, including expenses related
88. Walker has diverted funds from the 000 Account for her personal use.
89. Accordingly, Riley and Walker have caused loss and waste of 000
corporate assets and acquired 000 corporate assets for themselves, rendering then1liable
to URO under N-PCL §§ 719(a)(l) and 720(a)(l)(B) to account for their misconduct.
90. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
91. URO, Riley and Walker, in filings with the Attorney General, have,
among other things: (a) materially underreported UHO's revenues and expenses;
- 20
(b) failed to report payments made to workers and others; (c) failed to report
compensation or other funds flowing to Riley and Walker; and (d) failed to report related-
party transactions.
false and misleading statements and omissions in its filings with the OAG, in violation of
93. Because of Defendants' false and misleading filings, donors from the State
of New York, and beyond, have been prevented from making informed choices about
94. LTHO, Riley, Walker and all others acting under, through, or for them,
95. The Attomey General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
96. URO, at the direction of Riley and Walker, has exceeded the authority
conferred upon it by law, and acted beyond its capacity or power as provided by law and
its certificate of incorporation, in that, among other things, URO (a) conducts activities
for pecuniary profit or financial gain, in violation ofN-PCL § 102(a)(5)(I); (b) distributes
income and profits, in violation ofN-PCL §§ 102(a)(5)(2) and 515; and (c) engages in
incorporation.
- 21
97. Accordingly, URO, Riley and Walker, and persons acting under their
§§ 112(a)(1) and 112(a)(3) from soliciting funds from the public and from accessing,
98. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
99. Riley and Walker have, among other things, consistently and repeatedly
(a) breached their fiduciary obligations as officers and directors ofURO; (b) caused loss
and waste ofURO charitable assets, for their own personal gain, and for the benefit of
relatives and insiders; (c) consistently and repeatedly made, and caused to be nlade,
solicitation statements that are materially false and misleading; (d) consistently and
repeatedly failed to apply solicited funds in conformity with UHO's charitable purposes;
(e) failed to ensure that LillO maintains complete and correct books and records; (f)
caused materially false and misleading reports to be filed with the Attorney General; and
(g) consistently and repeatedly caused URO to act outside the authority granted to it by
100. Accordingly, Riley and Walker should be removed for cause as directors
and officers ofUHO, and permanently barred from re-election under N-PCL §§ 706(d)
and 714(c).
- 22
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
101. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
102. As directors and officers ofURO, Riley and Walker are trustees under
EPTL § 8-1.4(a), responsible for the proper adn1inistration ofUHO's charitable assets.
Riley and Walker have failed to properly administer UHO's charitable assets in that they
have failed to institute and maintain procedures to account for UHO's total revenues,
failed to maintain proper accounting records, failed to institute financial controls, and
failed to keep accurate books and records. Riley and Walker have failed to properly
administer UHO's charitable assets in that they have misappropriated funds from the
URO Account for their personal use. In addition, Riley has misappropriated four URO
vehicles by transferring title to himself. Riley and Walker have further failed to properly
administer UHO's charitable assets in that they have wasted UHO's assets by improperly
trustees ofURO, and ordered to account for their failure and to provide restitution to
URO.
104. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
- 23
105. 000 has exceeded the authority conferred upon it by law, and acted
beyond its capacity or power as provided by law and its certificate of incorporation, in that,
among other things, UHO (a) conducts activities for profit or gain, in violation ofN-PCL
and 515; and (c) engages in private inurement, in violation ofN-PCL § 102(a)(5)(2) and its
certificate of incorporation.
§§ 112(a)(1) and 1101(a)(2) and its remaining assets and future assets, if any, applied to
charitable uses consistent with 000 mission, as authorized by N-PCL §§ 1115(a) and
1008(a)(15).
(Against UHO)
107. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
108. LTHO has conducted its business in a persistently fraudulent and illegal
manner, in that 000 has, among other things, (a) filed materially false and misleading
reports with the Attorney General that materially misstate its revenues and expenses and
omit compensation, in violation of Exec. L. § 172-d(1); (b) persistently made false and
§ IIOI(a)(2) and its remaining assets and future assets, if any, applied to charitable uses
- 24
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION'
(Against UHO)
110. The Attorney General repeats and re-alleges, as though fully set forth
Ill. Under N-PCL § 112(a)(7), the Attorney General may maintain an action to
"enforce any right given under this chapter to ... a director or an officer of a Type B ...
may petition the court for judicial dissolution where "the directors ... in control of the
corporation have looted or wasted the corporate assets, have perpetuated the corporation
solely for their personal benefit, or have otherwise acted in an illegal, oppressive or
fraudulent manner."
112. Riley and Walker, as the directors in control ofUHO, have wasted its
corporate assets, perpetuated the corporation for their personal benefit and otherwise acted
§§ 1102(a)(2)(D) and 112(a)(7) and its remaining assets and future assets, if any, applied to
charitable uses consistent with the URO mission pursuant to N-PCL §§ 1115(a) and
1008(a)(15).
- 25
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
A. Enjoining Defendants UHO, Riley and Walker, and all other persons
acting or claiming to act on UHO's behalf or in concert or participation with it, from
B. Enjoining Riley and Walker, and all other persons acting or claiming to
act on their behalf or in concert or participation with them, from accessing, using, or
distributing URO funds or other assets, including but not limited to UHO's intellectual
URO;
F. Holding Defendants Riley and Walker liable for their waste and
G. Dissolving URO, with its remaining assets, including the vehicles, and
any future assets, to be transferred to charitable uses consistent with URO's mission; and
- 26
H. Granting such other and further relief as is just and proper.
By: =m-.~
PATRICIA T. NORTHROP
Assistant Attorney General
Charities Bureau
Office of the Attorney General
120 Broadway
New York, New York 10271
(212) 416-8391
O/Counsel:
JASON R. LILIEN
Bureau Chief, Charities Bureau
CAROLYN T. ELLIS
Assistant Attorney General,
Section Chief, Charities Bureau
KATHRYN E. DIAZ
Senior Trial Counsel,
Social Justice Division
- 27 - '