TY 2012 Form 990

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)	(C) Position (do not check more than one box, unless person is both an officer and a director/trustee)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)
(1) DAVID M GUERNSEY........................................................................ CHAIRMAN	1.0 .......................1.0	X		34,000	203
(2) TIM CLAYTON........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,200	203
(3) RUTH LOPEZ NOVODOR........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		16,200	203
(4) A JUNE LENNON........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		22,000	135
(5) THOMAS MICHAEL NOBIS........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		22,000	203
(6) MARIA COAKLEY DAVID........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		22,000	203
(7) NEVIN GROCE........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		22,000	203
(8) BETTY NEIGHBORS........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,751	203
(9) KURT SUMMERS........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		22,297	203
(10) JAMES HERR........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,200	203
(11) BRUCE O'DONOGHUE........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,200	203
(12) STEVE SCHRAMM........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,200	203
(13) JEFF READY........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.0 .......................1.0	X		17,200	203
(14) DONALD A DANNER........................................................................ PRESIDENT/CEO	1.0 .......................39.0	X	X	750,626	29,789
(15) MARY BLASINSKY........................................................................ SVP/SECRETARY	1.0 .......................39.0		X	308,784	33,767
(16) TAMMY S BOEHMS........................................................................ SVP/CFO	1.0 .......................39.0		X	393,353	23,429
(17) JEFF SMITH........................................................................ TREASURER	1.0 .......................39.0		X	184,138	17,936

Do not include amounts reported on lines 6b, 7b, 8b, 9b, and 10b of Part VIII.	(A) Total expenses	(B) Program service expenses	(C) Management and general expenses	(D) Fundraising expenses
1	Grants and other assistance to governments and organizations in the United States. See Part IV, line 21	0
2	Grants and other assistance to individuals in the United States. See Part IV, line 22	0
3	Grants and other assistance to governments, organizations, and individuals outside the United States. See Part IV, lines 15 and 16	0
4	Benefits paid to or for members	0
5	Compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees ....	237,402	237,402	0	0
6	Compensation not included above, to disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)) and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) ....	0
7	Other salaries and wages	277,916	277,916
8	Pension plan accruals and contributions (include section 401(k) and 403(b) employer contributions) ....	0
9	Other employee benefits .......	75,640	75,640
10	Payroll taxes ...........	26,997	26,997	0	0
11	Fees for services (non-employees):
a	Management ......	0
b	Legal .........	846,319	839,318	0	7,001
c	Accounting ...........	11,850	0	11,850	0
d	Lobbying ...........	0
e	Professional fundraising services. See Part IV, line 17	37,249			37,249
f	Investment management fees ......	0
g	Other (If line 11g amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 11g expenses on Schedule O) ........	328,382	238,600	1,232	88,550
12	Advertising and promotion ....	59,416	56,916	0	2,500
13	Office expenses .......	178,834	43,113	18,095	117,626
14	Information technology ......	0
15	Royalties ..	0
16	Occupancy ...........	0
17	Travel ............	26,498	19,325	7,173	0
18	Payments of travel or entertainment expenses for any federal, state, or local public officials ......	0
19	Conferences, conventions, and meetings ....	3,804	2,210	1,594	0
20	Interest ...........	0
21	Payments to affiliates .......	0
22	Depreciation, depletion, and amortization .....	0
23	Insurance ..............	0
24	Other expenses. Itemize expenses not covered above (List miscellaneous expenses in line 24e. If line 24e amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 24e expenses on Schedule O.)
a
b
c
d
e	All other expenses
25	Total functional expenses. Add lines 1 through 24e	2,110,307	1,817,437	39,944	252,926
26	Joint costs. Complete this line only if the organization reported in column (B) joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation. Check here if following SOP 98-2 (ASC 958-720).

Part X Balance Sheet Check if Schedule O contains a response to any question in this Part X ...............
	1	Cashnon-interest-bearing .............	0	1	0
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........	572,932	2	375,664
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........	8,798	3	15,030
4	Accounts receivable, net .............	541	4	0
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
		0	5	0
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
		0	6	0
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............	0	7	0
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............	0	8	0
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........	0	9	0
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b		0	10c
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........	0	11	0
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....	0	12	0
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....	0	13	0
14	Intangible assets ...............	0	14	0
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........	117,813	15	4,103
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......	700,084	16	394,797
	17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........	341,119	17	70,211
18	Grants payable .................	0	18	0
19	Deferred revenue ................	0	19	0
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............	0	20	0
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..	0	21	0
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........	0	22	0
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..	0	23	0
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....	0	24	0
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................	35,517	25	30,753
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........	376,636	26	100,964
		Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............	323,448	27	293,833
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........	0	28	0
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........	0	29	0
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........		30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....		31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds		32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........	323,448	33	293,833
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........	700,084	34	394,797

- TIN:

SCHEDULE A
(Form 990 or 990EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Public Charity Status and Public Support

Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section
4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ. right arrow

See separate instructions.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part I

Reason for Public Charity Status (All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions.

The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 11, check only one box.)

A church, convention of churches, or association of churches described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(i).

A school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). (Attach Schedule E.)

A hospital or a cooperative hospital service organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii).

A medical research organization operated in conjunction with a hospital described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). Enter the hospital's name, city, and state:

An organization operated for the benefit of a college or university owned or operated by a governmental unit described in

section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.)

A federal, state, or local government or governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(v).

An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

A community trust described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 331/3% of its support from contributions, membership fees, and gross

receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 331/3% of

its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses

acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.)

An organization organized and operated exclusively to test for public safety. See section 509(a)(4).

An organization organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2). See section 509(a)(3). Check the box that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 11e through 11h.

Type I

Type II

Type III - Functionally integrated

Type III - Non-functionally integrated

By checking this box, I certify that the organization is not controlled directly or indirectly by one or more disqualified persons other than foundation managers and other than one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2).

If the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, or Type III supporting organization, check this box ..................................................

Since August 17, 2006, has the organization accepted any gift or contribution from any of the
following persons?

(i) A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described in (ii)

Yes

and (iii) below, the governing body of the supported organization? ................

11g(i)

(ii) A family member of a person described in (i) above? ......................

11g(ii)

(iii) A 35% controlled entity of a person described in (i) or (ii) above? ................

11g(iii)

Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).

(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	(iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1- 9 above or IRC section (see instructions))	(iv) Is the organization in col. (i) listed in your governing document?		(v) Did you notify the organization in col. (i) of your support?		(vi) Is the organization in col. (i) organized in the U.S.?		(vii) Amount of monetary support
(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN		Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	(vii) Amount of monetary support
(A) NFIB INC	940707299	0	Yes						0

Total									0

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990EZ.

Cat. No. 11285F

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Page 2

Part II

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2008	(b) 2009	(c) 2010	(d) 2011	(e) 2012	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....
2	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.......
3	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
4	Total. Add lines 1 through 3
5	The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f)..
6	Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2008	(b) 2009	(c) 2010	(d) 2011	(e) 2012	(f) Total
7	Amounts from line 4..
8	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...
9	Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..
10	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part IV.)..
11	Total support (Add lines 7 through 10).

Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (see instructions) ..................

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here........................................ right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2012 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage for 2011 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 ...............

16a

33 1/3% support test—2012. If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box
and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....................... right arrow

33 1/3% support test—2011. If the organization did not check a box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this
box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..................... right arrow

17a

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2012. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b, and line 14
is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain
in Part IV how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported
organization ..................................................... right arrow

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2011. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a, and line
15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here.
Explain in Part IV how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly
supported organization ................................................ right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a, or 17b, check this box and see
instructions ..................................................... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 9 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part II.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2008	(b) 2009	(c) 2010	(d) 2011	(e) 2012	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .
2	Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose......
3	Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513..
4	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf...
5	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
6	Total. Add lines 1 through 5.
7a	Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons...
b	Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year.
c	Add lines 7a and 7b..
8	Public support (Subtract line 7c from line 6.)

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2008	(b) 2009	(c) 2010	(d) 2011	(e) 2012	(f) Total
9	Amounts from line 6...
10a	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
b	Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975.
c	Add lines 10a and 10b.
11	Net income from unrelated business activities not included in line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.
12	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part IV.) ..
13	Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.)..

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a 501(c)(3) organization,
check this box and stop here............................................. right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2012 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage from 2011 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 ...............

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage

Investment income percentage for 2012 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) ......

Investment income percentage from 2011 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 .............

19a

33 1/3% support tests—2012. If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ........ right arrow

33 1/3% support tests—2011. If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3% and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..... right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a, or 19b, check this box and see instructions ..... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Page 4

Part IV

Supplemental Information. Complete this part to provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; and Part III, line 12. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).

Facts And Circumstances Test

Explanation

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

Schedule B
(Form 990, 990-EZ,
or 990-PF)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Schedule of Contributors

Attach to Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Organization type (check one):

Filers of:

Section:

Form 990 or 990-EZ

501(c)( ) (enter number) organization

4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust not treated as a private foundation

527 political organization

Form 990-PF

501(c)(3) exempt private foundation

4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust treated as a private foundation

501(c)(3) taxable private foundation

Check if your organization is covered by the General Rule or a Special Rule.
Note. Only a section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organization can check boxes for both the General Rule and a Special Rule. See instructions.

General Rule

For an organization filing Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF that received, during the year, $5,000 or more (in money or
property) from any one contributor. Complete Parts I and II.

Special Rules

For a section 501(c)(3) organization filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that met the 33¹/3% support test of the regulations
under sections 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and received from any one contributor, during the year, a contribution of the
greater of (1) $5,000 or (2) 2% of the amount on (i) Form 990, Part VIII, line 1h, or (ii) Form 990-EZ, line 1. Complete Parts I and II.

For a section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organization filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor,
during the year, total contributions of more than $1,000 for use exclusively for religious, charitable,
scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Complete Parts I, II, and
III.

For a section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organization filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor,
during the year, contributions for use exclusively for religious, charitable, etc., purposes, but these contributions did
not total to more than $1,000. If this box is checked, enter here the total contributions that were received during
the year for an exclusively religious, charitable, etc., purpose. Do not complete any of the parts unless the General Rule
applies to this organization because it received nonexclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions of $5,000 or more
during the year ......................... Arrow Bullet

Caution. An organization that is not covered by the General Rule and/or the Special Rules does not file Schedule B (Form 990,
990-EZ, or 990-PF), but it must answer “No” on Part IV, line 2 of its Form 990; or check the box on line H of its
Form 990-EZ or on Part I, line 2 of its Form 990-PF, to certify that it does not meet the filing requirements of Schedule B (Form 990,
990-EZ, or 990-PF).

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions
for Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.

Cat. No. 30613XSchedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Page 2

Name of organization NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Part I	Contributors (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part I if additional space is needed.
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
RESTRICTED	RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED, RESTRICTED RESTRICTED	$RESTRICTED	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II if there is a noncash contribution.)
Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Page 3

Name of organization NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Part II	Noncash Property (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part II if additional space is needed.
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Page 4

Name of organization
NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part III

Exclusively religious, charitable, etc., individual contributions to section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organizations
that total more than $1,000 for the year. Complete columns (a) through (e) and the following line entry.
For organizations completing Part III, enter the total of exclusively religious, charitable, etc.,
contributions of $1,000 or less for the year. (Enter this information once. See instructions.) Arrow Bullet

$
Use duplicate copies of Part III if additional space is needed.

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2012)

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE D
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Financial Statements

Complete if the organization answered "Yes," to Form 990,
Part IV, line 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11e, 11f, 12a, or 12b
SchDMd Bullet

Attach to Form 990. SchDMd Bullet

See separate instructions.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part I

Organizations Maintaining Donor Advised Funds or Other Similar Funds or Accounts. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 6.

		(a) Donor advised funds	(b) Funds and other accounts
1	Total number at end of year .........
2	Aggregate contributions to (during year) ...
3	Aggregate grants from (during year) .....
4	Aggregate value at end of year ........

Did the organization inform all donors and donor advisors in writing that the assets held in donor advised
funds are the organization's property, subject to the organization's exclusive legal control? ............

Yes No

Did the organization inform all grantees, donors, and donor advisors in writing that grant funds can be
used only for charitable purposes and not for the benefit of the donor or donor advisor, or for any other purpose conferring impermissible private benefit? ...................................

Yes No

Part II

Conservation Easements. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 7.

Purpose(s) of conservation easements held by the organization (check all that apply).

Preservation of land for public use (e.g., recreation or education) Preservation of an historically important land area

Protection of natural habitat Preservation of a certified historic structure

Preservation of open space

Complete lines 2a through 2d if the organization held a qualified conservation contribution in the form of a conservation easement on the last day of the tax year.


a	Total number of conservation easements .......................	2a
b	Total acreage restricted by conservation easements ..................	2b
c	Number of conservation easements on a certified historic structure included in (a) .....	2c
d	Number of conservation easements included in (c) acquired after 8/17/06, and not on a historic structure listed in the National Register ....................	2d

Number of conservation easements modified, transferred, released, extinguished, or terminated by the organization during
the tax year SchDMd Bullet

Number of states where property subject to conservation easement is located SchDMd Bullet

Does the organization have a written policy regarding the periodic monitoring, inspection, handling of violations, and
enforcement of the conservation easements it holds? .............................

Yes No

Staff and volunteer hours devoted to monitoring, inspecting, and enforcing conservation easements during the year
SchDMd Bullet

Amount of expenses incurred in monitoring, inspecting, and enforcing conservation easements during the year
SchDMd Bullet

Does each conservation easement reported on line 2(d) above satisfy the requirements of section 170(h)(4)(B)(i) and section 170(h)(4)(B)(ii)? .......................................

Yes No

In Part XIII, describe how the organization reports conservation easements in its revenue and expense statement, and
balance sheet, and include, if applicable, the text of the footnote to the organization’s financial statements that describes
the organization’s accounting for conservation easements.

Part III

Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets.
Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 8.

If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), not to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide, in Part XIII, the text of the footnote to its financial statements that describes these items.

If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide the following amounts relating to these items:

(i)

Revenues included in Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 ........................ SchDMd Bullet

(ii)

Assets included in Form 990, Part X .............................. SchDMd Bullet

If the organization received or held works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets for financial gain, provide the
following amounts required to be reported under SFAS 116 (ASC 958) relating to these items:

Revenues included in Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 .......................... SchDMd Bullet

Assets included in Form 990, Part X ............................... SchDMd Bullet

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 52283D

Schedule D (Form 990) 2012

Page 2

Part III

Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets (continued)

Using the organization’s acquisition, accession, and other records, check any of the following that are a significant use of its collection items (check all that apply):

Public exhibition

Loan or exchange programs

Scholarly research

Other

Preservation for future generations

Provide a description of the organization’s collections and explain how they further the organization’s exempt purpose in
Part XIII.

During the year, did the organization solicit or receive donations of art, historical treasures or other similar
assets to be sold to raise funds rather than to be maintained as part of the organization’s collection?........

Yes No

Part IV

Escrow and Custodial Arrangements. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990,
Part IV, line 9, or reported an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21.

Is the organization an agent, trustee, custodian or other intermediary for contributions or other assets not
included on Form 990, Part X? ....................................

Yes No

If "Yes," explain the arrangement in Part XIII and complete the following table:


c	Beginning balance .................................	1c
d	Additions during the year ..............................	1d
e	Distributions during the year .............................	1e
f	Ending balance ...................................	1f

Did the organization include an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21? .....................

Yes No

If “Yes,” explain the arrangement in Part XIII. Check here if the explanation has been provided in Part XIII ........

Part V

Endowment Funds. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 10.

		(a)Current year	(b)Prior year	b (c)Two years back	(d)Three years back	(e)Four years back
1a	Beginning of year balance ....
b	Contributions ........
c	Net investment earnings, gains, and losses
d	Grants or scholarships .....
e	Other expenditures for facilities and programs ........
f	Administrative expenses ....
g	End of year balance ......

Provide the estimated percentage of the current year end balance (line 1g, column (a)) held as:

Board designated or quasi-endowment SchDMd Bullet

Permanent endowment SchDMd Bullet

Temporarily restricted endowment SchDMd Bullet

The percentages in lines 2a, 2b, and 2c should equal 100%.

Are there endowment funds not in the possession of the organization that are held and administered for the
organization by:

Yes

(i) unrelated organizations ........................

3a(i)

(ii) related organizations ........................

3a(ii)

If "Yes" to 3a(ii), are the related organizations listed as required on Schedule R? .........

Describe in Part XIII the intended uses of the organization's endowment funds.

Part VI

Land, Buildings, and Equipment. See Form 990, Part X, line 10.

Description of property		(a) Cost or other basis (investment)	(b)Cost or other basis (other)	(c) Accumulated depreciation	(d) Book value
1a	Land .................
b	Buildings ................
c	Leasehold improvements ............
d	Equipment ................
e	Other .................
Total. Add lines 1a through 1e. (Column (d) must equal Form 990, Part X, column (B), line 10(c).).......

Schedule D (Form 990) 2012

Page 3

Part VII

InvestmentsOther Securities. See Form 990, Part X, line 12.

(a) Description of security or category (including name of security)		(b)Book value	(c) Method of valuation: Cost or end-of-year market value
(1)Financial derivatives
(2)Closely-held equity interests
Other








Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 12.)

Part VIII

InvestmentsProgram Related. See Form 990, Part X, line 13.

(a) Description of investment type		(b) Book value	(c) Method of valuation: Cost or end-of-year market value









Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 13.)

Part IX

Other Assets. See Form 990, Part X, line 15.

(a) Description				(b) Book value









Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 15.)...........

Part X

Other Liabilities. See Form 990, Part X, line 25.

1.(a) Description of liability		(b) Book value
Federal income taxes		0
DUE TO AFFILIATES		11,144
VACATION ACCRUAL		19,609







Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 25.)		30,753
2. Fin 48 (ASC 740) Footnote. In Part XIII, provide the text of the footnote to the organization's financial statements that reports the organization's liability for uncertain tax positions under FIN 48 (ASC 740). Check here if the text of the footnote has been provided in Part XIII .....................................................

Schedule D (Form 990) 2012

Page 4

Part XI Reconciliation of Revenue per Audited Financial Statements With Revenue per Return
1	Total revenue, gains, and other support per audited financial statements .......			1	2,297,717
2	Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12:
a	Net unrealized gains on investments ..........	2a
b	Donated services and use of facilities .........	2b	217,025
c	Recoveries of prior year grants ...........	2c
d	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	2d
e	Add lines 2a through 2d .....................			2e	217,025
3	Subtract line 2e from line 1.....................			3	2,080,692
4	Amounts included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12, but not on line 1:
a	Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b .	4a
b	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ...........	4b
c	Add lines 4a and 4b.......................			4c
5	Total revenue. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 12.) ......			5	2,080,692

Part XII Reconciliation of Expenses per Audited Financial Statements With Expenses per Return
1	Total expenses and losses per audited financial statements ...........			1	2,327,332
2	Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part IX, line 25:
a	Donated services and use of facilities ..........	2a	217,025
b	Prior year adjustments ..............	2b
c	Other losses ................	2c
d	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	2d
e	Add lines 2a through 2d......................			2e	217,025
3	Subtract line 2e from line 1.....................			3	2,110,307
4	Amounts included on Form 990, Part IX, line 25, but not on line 1:
a	Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b ..	4a
b	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	4b
c	Add lines 4a and 4b.......................			4c
5	Total expenses. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 18.) ......			5	2,110,307

Part XIII

Supplemental Information

Complete this part to provide the descriptions required for Part II, lines 3, 5, and 9; Part III, lines 1a and 4; Part lV, lines 1b and 2b;
Part V, line 4; Part X, line 2; Part XI, lines 2d and 4b; and Part XII, lines 2d and 4b. Also complete this part to provide any additional information.

Identifier	Return Reference	Explanation
FIN 48 (ASC TOPIC 740) FOOTNOTE	SCHEDULE D, XIII	THE LEGAL CENTER IS EXEMPT FROM THE PAYMENT OF INCOME TAXES ON RELATED INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 501(A) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AS AN ENTITY DESCRIBED UNDER 501(C)(3). THE LEGAL CENTER IS, HOWEVER, SUBJECT TO FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME. THE LEGAL CENTER DID NOT HAVE ANY MATERIAL UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME TAX LIABILITY FOR THE THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 AND 2011; NOR DID THE LEGAL CENTER HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 AND 2011.

Schedule D (Form 990) 2012

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE G (Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Information Regarding
Fundraising or Gaming Activities

Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, lines 17, 18, or 19, or if the organization entered more than $15,000 on Form 990-EZ, line 6a. Form 990-EZ filers are not required to complete this part. right arrow

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ. right arrow

See separate instructions.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization
NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part I

Fundraising Activities. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 17.

Indicate whether the organization raised funds through any of the following activities. Check all that apply.

a	Mail solicitations	e	Solicitation of non-government grants
b	Internet and email solicitations	f	Solicitation of government grants
c	Phone solicitations	g	Special fundraising events
d	In-person solicitations

Did the organization have a written or oral agreement with any individual (including officers, directors, trustees

or key employees listed in Form 990, Part VII) or entity in connection with professional fundraising services?

Yes

If “Yes,” list the ten highest paid individuals or entities (fundraisers) pursuant to agreements under which the fundraiser is
to be compensated at least $5,000 by the organization.

(i) Name and address of individual or entity (fundraiser)		(ii) Activity	(iii) Did fundraiser have custody or control of contributions?		(iv) Gross receipts from activity	(v) Amount paid to (or retained by) fundraiser listed in col. (i)	(vi) Amount paid to (or retained by) organization
			Yes	No
	NATIONAL CAPITAL TELESERVICES LLC 300 5TH ST NE WASHINGTON, DC20002	TELE MARKETING		No	39,715	37,249	2,466









Total .................					39,715	37,249	2,466

List all states in which the organization is registered or licensed to solicit funds or has been notified it is exempt from registration or licensing.

AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 50083H

Schedule G (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Page 2

Part II

Fundraising Events. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 18, or reported more than $15,000 of fundraising event contributions and gross income on Form 990-EZ, lines 1 and 6b. List events with gross receipts greater than $5,000.

			(a) Event #1 (event type)	(b) Event #2 (event type)	(c) Other events (total number)	(d) Total events (add col. (a) through col. (c))
	1	Gross receipts . . .
	2	Less: Contributions . .
	3	Gross income (line 1 minus line 2) . . .
	4	Cash prizes . . .
	5	Noncash prizes . .
	6	Rent/facility costs . .
	7	Food and beverages .
	8	Entertainment . . .
	9	Other direct expenses .
	10	Direct expense summary. Add lines 4 through 9 in column (d) ...........
	11	Net income summary. Combine line 3, column (d), and line 10. ..........

Part III

Gaming. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 19, or reported more than $15,000 on Form 990-EZ, line 6a.

(a) Bingo

(b) Pull tabs/Instant
bingo/progressive bingo

(c) Other gaming

(d) Total gaming (add col.(a) through col.(c))

Gross revenue . . . .

Cash prizes . . . .

Non-cash prizes . . .

Rent/facility costs . . .

Other direct expenses . .

Volunteer labor . . .

	Yes
	No

	Yes
	No

	Yes
	No

Direct expense summary. Add lines 2 through 5 in column (d) ........... right arrow

Net gaming income summary. Combine lines 1 and 7 in column (d) .......... right arrow

Enter the state(s) in which the organization operates gaming activities:

Is the organization licensed to operate gaming activities in each of these states? ............

YesNo

If "No," explain:

10a

Were any of the organization's gaming licenses revoked, suspended or terminated during the tax year? .....

YesNo

If "Yes," explain:

Schedule G (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Page 3

Does the organization operate gaming activities with nonmembers? .................

YesNo

Is the organization a grantor, beneficiary or trustee of a trust or a member of a partnership or other entity

formed to administer charitable gaming? ..........................

YesNo

Indicate the percentage of gaming activity operated in:

The organization's facility ......................

13a

An outside facility ........................

13b

Enter the name and address of the person who prepares the organization's gaming/special events books and records:

Name

Address

15a

Does the organization have a contract with a third party from whom the organization receives gaming

revenue? ......................................

YesNo

If "Yes," enter the amount of gaming revenue received by the organization right arrow

$ and the

amount of gaming revenue retained by the third party right arrow

$ .

If "Yes," enter name and address of the third party:

Name

Address

Gaming manager information:

Name

Gaming manager compensation right arrow

Description of services provided right arrow

Director/officer Employee Independent contractor

Mandatory distributions:

Is the organization required under state law to make charitable distributions from the gaming proceeds to

retain the state gaming license? ............................

YesNo

Enter the amount of distributions required under state law distributed to other exempt organizations or spent

in the organization's own exempt activities during the tax year right arrow

Part IV

Supplemental Information. Complete this part to provide the explanations required by Part I, line 2b, columns (iii) and (v), and Part III, lines 9, 9b, 10b, 15b, 15c, 16, and 17b, as applicable. Also complete this part to provide any additional information (see instructions).

Identifier	Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule G (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

Schedule J
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Compensation Information

For certain Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest
Compensated Employees
SchJMediumBullet

Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990,
Part IV, question 23.
SchJMediumBullet

Attach to Form 990. SchJMediumBullet

See separate instructions.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part I

Questions Regarding Compensation

Yes

Check the appropiate box(es) if the organization provided any of the following to or for a person listed in Form
990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a. Complete Part III to provide any relevant information regarding these items.

First-class or charter travel Housing allowance or residence for personal use

Travel for companions Payments for business use of personal residence

Tax idemnification and gross-up payments Health or social club dues or initiation fees

Discretionary spending account Personal services (e.g., maid, chauffeur, chef)

If any of the boxes in line 1a are checked, did the organization follow a written policy regarding payment or reimbursement or provision of all of the expenses described above? If "No," complete Part III to explain....

Yes

Did the organization require substantiation prior to reimbursing or allowing expenses incurred by all officers,
directors, trustees, and the CEO/Executive Director, regarding the items checked in line 1a? .......

Indicate which, if any, of the following the filing organization used to establish the compensation of the
organization's CEO/Executive Director. Check all that apply. Do not check any boxes for methods
used by a related organization to establish compensation of the CEO/Executive Director, but explain in Part III.

Compensation committee Written employment contract

Independent compensation consultant Compensation survey or study

Form 990 of other organizations Approval by the board or compensation committee

During the year, did any person listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a with respect to the filing organization or a related organization:

Receive a severance payment or change-of-control payment? ................

Participate in, or receive payment from, a supplemental nonqualified retirement plan? .........

Yes

Participate in, or receive payment from, an equity-based compensation arrangement? .........

If "Yes" to any of lines 4a-c, list the persons and provide the applicable amounts for each item in Part III.

Only 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations only must complete lines 5-9.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization pay or accrue any
compensation contingent on the revenues of:

The organization? ...........................

Any related organization? .........................

If "Yes," to line 5a or 5b, describe in Part III.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization pay or accrue any
compensation contingent on the net earnings of:

The organization? ...........................

Any related organization? .........................

If "Yes," to line 6a or 6b, describe in Part III.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization provide any non-fixed
payments not described in lines 5 and 6? If "Yes," describe in Part III ............

Yes

Were any amounts reported in Form 990, Part VII, paid or accured pursuant to a contract that was
subject to the initial contract exception described in Regulations section 53.4958-4(a)(3)? If "Yes," describe
in Part III .............................

If "Yes" to line 8, did the organization also follow the rebuttable presumption procedure described in Regulations section 53.4958-6(c)? .........................

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 50053T

Schedule J (Form 990) 2012

Page 2

Part II

Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees. Use duplicate copies if additional space is needed.

For each individual whose compensation must be reported in Schedule J, report compensation from the organization on row (i) and from related organizations, described in the
instructions, on row (ii). Do not list any individuals that are not listed on Form 990, Part VII.
Note. The sum of columns (B)(i)-(iii) for each listed individual must equal the total amount of Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, applicable column (D) and (E) amounts for that individual.

(A) Name and Title		(B) Breakdown of W-2 and/or 1099-MISC compensation			(C) Retirement and other deferred compensation	(D) Nontaxable benefits	(E) Total of columns (B)(i)-(D)	(F) Compensation reported as deferred in prior Form 990
(A) Name and Title		(i) Base compensation	(ii) Bonus & incentive compensation	(iii) Other reportable compensation	(C) Retirement and other deferred compensation	(D) Nontaxable benefits	(E) Total of columns (B)(i)-(D)	(F) Compensation reported as deferred in prior Form 990
(1)DONALD A DANNERPRESIDENT/CEO	(i) (ii)	0 523,878	0 180,250	0 46,498	0 11,575	0 18,214	0 780,415	0 0
(2)MARY BLASINSKYSVP/SECRETARY	(i) (ii)	0 219,106	0 75,740	0 13,938	0 14,900	0 18,867	0 342,551	0 0
(3)TAMMY S BOEHMSSVP/CFO	(i) (ii)	0 285,594	0 97,528	0 10,231	0 11,538	0 11,891	0 416,782	0 0
(4)JEFF SMITHTREASURER	(i) (ii)	0 154,323	0 28,019	0 1,796	0 9,164	0 8,772	0 202,074	0 0
(5)SUSAN M ECKERLYSVP	(i) (ii)	0 240,015	0 82,915	0 3,942	0 11,332	0 18,692	0 356,896	0 0
(6)KAREN R HARNEDEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR	(i) (ii)	189,736 0	28,800 0	2,051 0	2,266 0	14,549 0	237,402 0	0 0
(7)BETH MILITOSENIOR EXECUTIVE COUNSEL	(i) (ii)	160,342 0	14,906 0	2,027 0	6,179 0	924 0	184,378 0	0 0

Schedule J (Form 990) 2012

Page 3

Part III

Supplemental Information

Complete this part to provide the information, explanation, or descriptions required for Part I, lines 1a, 1b, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, 7, and 8, and for Part II.
Also complete this part for any additional information.

Identifier	Return Reference	Explanation
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING ACCOUNT	SCHEDULE J, PART I, LINE 1	THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE COUNSEL OF THE COMPANY RECEIVE CELLULAR PHONE/DATA SERVICE ALLOWANCE. IN COMPLIANCE WITH IRS CODE SECTION 132, THESE FRINGE BENEFITS ARE TREATED AS TAXABLE SALARY, SUBJECT TO WITHHOLDING, ON THE EMPLOYEE'S W-2.
COMPENSATION ESTABLISHED BY RELATED ORGANIZATION	SCHEDULE J, PART I, LINE 3	NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER RELIES ON THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, INC., A RELATED ORGANIZATION, TO ESTABLISH THE CEO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, INC. USES ONE OR MORE OF THE METHODS DESCRIBED ON SCHEDULE J, LINE 3 TO ESTABLISH THE CEO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION.
SUPPLEMENTAL NONQUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLAN	SCHEDULE J, LINE 4B	THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, INC. PROVIDES SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLANS (SERPS). THESE NONQUALIFIED PLANS COVER CERTAIN KEY MANAGMENT AND EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL. PARTICIPATION IN ALL SERPS HAS BEEN FROZEN AND FUTURE BENEFIT ACCRUALS FOR THE PLANS HAVE CEASED. NO PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO ANY SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN IN 2012.
INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN	SCHEDULE J, LINE 7	THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE COUNSEL OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER PARTICIPATE IN AN INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN WITH A PORTION OF THE INCENTIVE BASED ON MANAGEMENT'S REVIEW OF THEIR PERFORMANCE DURING THE YEAR.

Schedule J (Form 990) 2012

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE O
(Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ

Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on
Form 990 or to provide any additional information.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Identifier	Return Reference	Explanation
VOLUNTEERS	FORM 990, PART I, LINE 6	IN 2012, THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER USED THE SERVICES OF TWENTY VOLUNTEERS. THE LEGAL CENTER HAS A FOURTEEN MEMBER ADVISORY BOARD CONSISTING OF PRO BONO ATTORNEYS ADVISING THE LEGAL CENTER OF WHICH CASES TO GET INVOLVED IN HELPING SMALL BUSINESSES. THE LEGAL CENTER ALSO HAD SIX PRO BONO ATTORNEYS WRITE LEGAL BRIEFS FOR THE CENTER.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012	FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4a	APAC-TENNESSEE, INC. V. BRYANT - LIMITING NONECONOMIC DAMAGE AWARDS MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT APAC-TENNESSEE, INC. V. BRYANT CONCERNS THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE MISSISSIPPI'S $1 MILLION LIMIT ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES IN GENERAL CIVIL ACTIONS. NFIB SUPPORTS THE LIMIT ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES IN THESE TYPES OF CASES. THIS IS THE SECOND APPEAL PENDING BEFORE THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT INVOLVING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CAP. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED. ARKANSAS GAME & FISH COMM. V. US - PROPERTY RIGHTS U.S. SUPREME COURT THE CASE WILL DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT PROPERTY OWNERS CAN BE COMPENSATED UNDER THE FIFTH AMENDMENT FOR DAMAGES CAUSED TO THEIR PROPERTY AS THE RESULT OF TEMPORARY GOVERNMENT INVASIONS (I.E. FLOODING, ETC.). HISTORICALLY, PROPERTY OWNERS FACE SIGNIFICANT LEGAL HURDLES WHEN SEEKING COMPENSATION FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE CAUSED BY SHORT-TERM GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND PROJECTS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 7/3/12. AUTOMOTIVE UNITED TRADES ORGANIZATION (AUTO) V. WASHINGTON - GAS TAX CHALLENGE WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT VICTORY! GAS STATION OWNERS ARE SUING WASHINGTON FOR $90 MILLION IN FUEL TAX FUNDS THAT THEY SAY HAS BEEN UNLAWFULLY PAID TO INDIAN TRIBES. AUTO SEEKS TO STOP THE STATE FROM PAYING THE TRIBES REFUND ON THE GAS TAX BECAUSE THE TRIBES DID NOT PAY THE TAXES WHICH THE STATE IS ISSUING REFUNDS. THE TAX REFUNDS PERMIT TRIBAL GAS STATIONS TO SELL FUEL AT A MUCH LOWER PRICE (AROUND 5 CENTS PER GALLON LESS). MIXED IN WITH THIS IS A DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUE WHERE THE COUNTY JUDGE DISMISSED THE CASE SINCE TRIBES CANNOT BE SUED IN STATE OR FEDERAL COURT. HOWEVER, AUTO ARGUES THAT THE TRIBES ARE INDISPENSABLE PARTIES TO THE SUIT WHERE THE SUIT CANNOT BE LITIGATED FAIRLY AND COMPLETELY IN THEIR ABSENCE. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 7/5/11. COURT GRANTED REVIEW 9/8/11. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF PETITIONERS ON 8/30/12. BANKHEAD V. ARVINMERITOR - DEFENDING LIMITS ON PUNITIVE DAMAGES CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT THIS DECISION ADDS TO THE DISARRAY IN CALIFORNIA COURTS AS TO HOW TO ASSESS A COMPANY'S FINANCIAL HEALTH IN ASSESSING A PUNITIVE DAMAGES AMOUNT. PLAINTIFFS ATTEMPT TO INFLATE A COMPANY'S ASSETS AND WORTH AND DIMINISH ITS LIABILITY TO SUPPORT A HIGHER PUNITIVE AWARD. WITH THIS OPINION, PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS WOULD UNDERMINE THE NET WORTH OF A COMPANY WHEN IT SUITS THEM AND ENGAGE IN ATTEMPTS TO PRESENT EVIDENCE OF HOW MUCH THE CEO AND OTHER EXECUTIVES GET PAID, HOW MUCH OF CREDIT LINE A COMPANY HAS, AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF ASSETS WITHOUT CORRESPONDING DEFERENCE TO LIABILITIES. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS LETTER BRIEF FILED 6/4/12. COURT DECLINED REQUEST TO REVIEW PUNITIVE DAMAGE AWARD. BARABIN V. ASTENJOHNSON - ANY ASBESTOS EXPOSURE TOO SPECULATIVE TO HOLD DEFENDANT LIABLE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTORY! PLAINTIFF BARABIN ARGUES THAT HE CAN SUE AND WIN BASED ON "ANY EXPOSURE" TO ASBESTOS NO MATTER HOW MINUTE. HERE, PLAINTIFF WAS EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS IN 1974 WHEN HE CAME INTO CONTACT WITH A PAPER MACHINE PART THAT CONTAINED TRACE AMOUNTS OF ASBESTOS, BUT HE IS UNABLE TO CONFIRM THAT DEFENDANT MANUFACTURED THE PART. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 05/26/11. COURT VACATED JUDGMENT ON 11/16/12 AND ORDERED HEARING ON DAMAGES. BRINKER V. SUPERIOR COURT - EXPANSION OF MANDATORY MEAL AND REST BREAK CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT VICTORY! VOIDING A TRIAL COURT'S 2006 DECISION THAT AN ESTIMATED 59,000 TO 63,000 CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES COULD JOIN A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE DALLAS-BASED COMPANY, THE CALIFORNIA 4TH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL RULED THAT EMPLOYER BRINKER ONLY HAD TO "MAKE AVAILABLE" MEAL AND REST BREAKS TO ITS WORKERS, NOT TO "ENSURE" THE BREAKS WERE TAKEN. THE APPELLATE COURT RULED THAT EMPLOYERS NEED ONLY MAKE MEAL BREAKS AVAILABLE TO EMPLOYEES; IF THE EMPLOYEE FOR SOME REASON DOESN'T WANT TO TAKE IT OR VOLUNTARILY WORKS THROUGH IT, THE EMPLOYER CANNOT BE PENALIZED. THE EMPLOYEES HAVE APPEALED THE DECISION TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 8/19/09. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF BRINKER ON APRIL 12, 2012. CCA ASSOCIATES V. UNITED STATES - REGULATORY TAKING U.S. SUPREME COURT CERT PETITION THE COURT IS BEING ASKED TO DECIDE WHETHER THE UNITED STATES OWES JUST COMPENSATION BECAUSE IT PROHIBITED A SMALL BUSINESS FROM REDEVELOPING A RENTAL PROPERTY OVER THE COURSE OF AN EIGHT YEAR PERIOD, DURING WHICH TIME THE BUSINESS LOST OVER $700,000 IN NET INCOME. SMALL BUSINESSES ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY FACE AN UPHILL BATTLE IN SEEKING COMPENSATION FOR GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS WHICH TAKE AWAY THE VALUE OF THEIR PROPERTIES. THE EXISTING TAKINGS TEST IS HIGHLY UNPREDICTABLE. THIS CASE PRESENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENCOURAGE THE SUPREME COURT TO RETOOL THE TAKINGS TEST IN A WAY THAT IS FAIR TO LANDOWNERS. STATUS: PETITION FOR CERTIORARI DENIED ON 10/9/12. CHRISTOPHER V. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM - WAGE AND HOUR (FLSA) SUPREME COURT OF UNITED STATES THE CASE CENTERS AROUND THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT, WHICH STATES EMPLOYERS ARE EXEMPT FROM PAYING OVERTIME TO "OUTSIDE SALESMEN." THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION IS RE-INTERPRETING THE LAW TO COMPEL THE RESPONDENT, GLAXOSMITHKLINE TO PAY OVERTIME TO THE PETITIONERS, WHOM THE EMPLOYER CONSIDERED "OUTSIDE SALESMEN" FOR THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY. IF THE PETITIONER IS SUCCESSFUL, IT WOULD GIVE BROAD POWER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TO MAKE RULES BY RE-INTERPRETING STATUTE, AND WOULD COMPEL SMALL BUSINESSES TO PAY OVERTIME TO OUTSIDE SALESMEN, CONTRARY TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF SMITHKLINE ON 3/27/12; ORAL ARGUMENTS OCCURRED ON 4/16/12 CHERRY V. SHAW COASTAL - LABOR & EMPLOYMENT AND TITLE VII U.S. FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED PLAINTIFF'S LAWSUIT BROUGHT UNDER TITLE VII CLAIMING A SAME-SEX HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT. WHILE NFIB CONCEDES THE EMPLOYEE ACCUSED OF CREATING THE HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT WAS APPROPRIATELY TERMINATED AND THAT HIS CONDUCT WAS RUDE AND OBNOXIOUS, NFIB BELIEVES HIS CONDUCT DOES NOT REPRESENT AN ACTIONABLE LEGAL CLAIM UNDER TITLE VII. NFIB URGED THE FIFTH CIRCUIT TO REINFORCE THE WELL-SETTLED PRINCIPLE THAT TITLE VII IS NOT A GENERAL CIVILITY CODE. CONDUCT MUST BE SEVERE OR PERSUASIVE TO BE ACTIONABLE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 6/22/11. CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS V. FCC - REGULATORY U.S. SUPREME COURT THE COURT HAS BEEN ASKED TO DECIDE WHETHER, CONTRARY TO THE DECISIONS OF AT LEAST TWO OTHER CIRCUITS, A COURT SHOULD APPLY CHEVRON TO REVIEW AN AGENCY'S DETERMINATION OF ITS OWN JURISDICTION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 11/26/12. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 1/16/13. COLE V. HARVEYLAND - STATE EMPLOYMENT LAW EXEMPTION FOR SMALL BUSINESS WASHINGTON COURT OF APPEALS THE ISSUE IS WHETHER WASHINGTON COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION SUITS AGAINST EMPLOYERS WITH FEWER THAN EIGHT EMPLOYEES. THE WASHINGTON LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION SAYS THAT SMALL EMPLOYERS ARE EXEMPT FROM THE LAW. THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE EXEMPTION OPERATES AS A JURISDICTIONAL BAR. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EMPLOYER ON 11/1/10. COLEMAN V. SOCCER ASSOCIATION OF MARYLAND - DEFENDING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS THE PLAINTIFF, A VOLUNTEER SOCCER COACH IN COLUMBIA, MD., WAS HORSING AROUND AND JUMPED UP TO HANG ONTO THE CROSSBAR OF A SOCCER GOAL. THE GOAL TIPPED OVER AND INJURED HIM. THE JURY FOUND THAT HE WAS AT LEAST PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OWN HARM, BARRING HIM FROM ANY RECOVERY UNDER MD. LAW. FOR YEARS, PLAINTIFFS HAVE TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY TO GET THE LEGISLATURE TO MOVE TO A COMPARATIVE FAULT SYSTEM, SO NOW THEY ARE TURNING TO THE COURT TO GET A CHANGE IN THE LAW. MARYLAND IS ONE OF A HANDFUL OF STATES THAT STILL PERMIT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AS A COMPLETE BAR TO A PLAINTIFF'S RECOVERY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT 7/10/12. COLONY COVE V. CITY OF CARSON - PROPERTY RIGHTS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT. PETITION NFIB JOINED A PETITION THAT URGED THE SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN PRECEDENT REQUIRING PROPERTY OWNERS TO RIPEN THEIR CLAIMS FOR JUST COMPENSATION IN STATE COURT AS A PREREQUISITE FOR A CLAIM UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983. THE BRIEF WOULD DISCUSS THE TENSION BETWEEN THE INTENT OF 1983 AND THE SUBSEQUENT MIX OF STATUTE AND PRECEDENT THAT EFFECTIVELY BLOCKS PROPERTY OWNERS FROM A HEARING IN FEDERAL COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 9/14/11.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		COMER V. MURPHY OIL USA (2010) - LIABILITY FOR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS & COMER V. MURPHY OIL USA II (2012) U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT MISSISSIPPI RESIDENT NED COMER IS THE LEAD PLAINTIFF IN THIS CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT DEMANDING MAJOR DAMAGE PAYMENTS FROM A HOST OF ENERGY COMPANIES ON THE THEORY THAT THE COMPANIES' CARBON EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTED TO GLOBAL WARMING, WHICH IN TURN SUPPOSEDLY CAUSED A STRENGTHENING OF HURRICANE KATRINA, WHICH DAMAGED THEIR PROPERTIES IN 2005. THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 5/7/10. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED BECAUSE ANOTHER JUDGE RECUSED HIMSELF, DEPRIVING THE EN BANC COURT OF THE QUORUM TO HEAR THE CASE. CASE PRESENTED TO THE 5TH CIRCUIT AGAIN IN 2012. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 9/29/12. CORTEZ V. NACCO - WORKERS' COMPENSATION OREGON SUPREME COURT THE OREGON COURT OF APPEALS RULED THAT WORKERS' COMP NEED NOT BE THE "EXCLUSIVE REMEDY" FOR INJURED WORKERS. THE RULING SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERCUT LIABILITY PROTECTIONS FOR LLC OWNERS AND MEMBERS. NACCO PETITIONED THE OREGON SUPREME COURT FOR REVIEW OF THE CASE. NFIB SUPPORTED THE PETITIONERS AT BOTH THE CERT AND MERITS STAGES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR REVIEW ON 8/3/12. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON THE MERITS ON 2/5/13. CTIA V. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO - REGULATORY U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SAN FRANCISCO'S CELL PHONE "RIGHT TO KNOW ORDINANCE" IMPOSES A WARNING OBLIGATION ON RETAILERS OF CELL PHONES WITHIN THE CITY. THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES RETAILERS TO PUT UP POSTERS IN THEIR STORES, ATTACH STICKERS TO THEIR CELL PHONE DISPLAYS, AND DISTRIBUTE "FACTSHEETS," ALL OF WHICH ARE DESIGNED BY THE CITY TO ADVISE CONSUMERS ABOUT THE SUPPOSED RISKS AND STEPS CONSUMERS CAN TAKE TO AVOID THEM. ON OCTOBER 27, A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT ENJOINED THE ORDINANCE. THE CASE PRESENTS SIGNIFICANT FIRST AMENDMENT CONCERNS STEMMING FROM THE FACT THAT GOVERNMENTS MAY START REQUIRING BUSINESSES OF ALL SIZES TO MAKE HEALTH DISCLOSURES BASED ON NOTHING BUT THE POSSIBILITY OF HARM TO CONSUMERS. SUCH REGULATIONS WOULD NO DOUBT IMPOSE SUBSTANTIAL BURDENS ON THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMUNITY. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF CTIA ON 2/1/12. THE APPELLATE COURT STRUCK DOWN THE WARNING ON 9/10/12. DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE V. EPA - LEGAL REFORM D.C. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL IN RECENT YEARS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS HAVE INCREASINGLY SOUGHT TO INFLUENCE PUBLIC POLICY BY BRINGING LAWSUITS AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THEN OFFERING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS. THESE "SUE-AND-SETTLE" TACTICS ARE CONCERNING BECAUSE IT ALLOWS IDEOLOGICALLY DRIVEN ORGANIZATIONS TO HOLD PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES AND TO THEN INFLUENCE PUBLIC POLICY DECISIONS. THIS ISSUE IS OF CONCERN TO SMALL BUSINESS BECAUSE BUSINESS OWNERS ARE OFTEN IMPACTED BY THESE FORCED POLICY DECISIONS. IN THIS CASE, ENVIRONMENTALISTS FILED SUIT AGAINST THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) AND IMMEDIATELY OFFERED A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH WOULD BIND THE EPA TO A SCHEDULE FOR PROMULGATING ELECTRIC EFFLUENT LIMITATION GUIDELINES. SINCE THIS WOULD IMPACT THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES INDUSTRY, THE UTILITY WATER ACT GROUP (UWAG) SOUGHT TO INTERVENE TO OPPOSE THE TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE REQUIRE ONLY THAT AN INTERVENER HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE CASE, THE DISTRICT COURT DENIED UWAG'S MOTION FOR INTERVENTION. THE COURT HELD THAT UWAG NEEDED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT HAD SUFFERED AN ACTUAL INJURY BEFORE IT COULD BE ALLOWED TO INTERVENE. ON APPEAL, THE NFIB LEGAL CENTER JOINED WITH THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS IN FILING AN AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF UWAG. WE URGED THE D.C. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL TO HOLD THAT THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE MOTION TO INTERVENE. WE ARGUED THAT THE D.C. CIRCUIT SHOULD SIDE WITH THE MAJORITY OF OTHER FEDERAL CIRCUITS IN REJECTING ANY HEIGHTENED REQUIREMENT BEYOND WHAT THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE REQUIRE. FURTHERMORE, WE EXPLAINED THAT THE COURT WOULD BENEFIT FROM INTERVENTION IN THIS CASE BECAUSE UWAG COULD OFFER IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE FROM THE REGULATED COMMUNITY ON THE IMPACT OF SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT GIVEN THAT THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WILL AFFECT THE BROADER PUBLIC. STATUS: AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF INTERVENER-MOTION FILED ON 08/01/12. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE V. COX INTERIOR, INC. - STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR TAX REFUND KENTUCKY SUPREME COURT KENTUCKY HAS ARGUED THAT FAILURE TO PROTEST A TAX AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT BARS A BUSINESS TAXPAYER FROM LATER OBTAINING A REFUND OF OVERPAID TAXES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 1/27/12. DOWNING/SALT POND V. RHODE ISLAND - CHALLENGING STATE TAKING IN FEDERAL COURT U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT. PETITION NFIB JOINED A PETITION THAT URGED THE SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN PRECEDENT REQUIRING PROPERTY OWNERS TO RIPEN THEIR CLAIMS FOR JUST COMPENSATION IN STATE COURT AS A PREREQUISITE FOR A CLAIM UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983. THE BRIEF WOULD DISCUSS THE TENSION BETWEEN THE INTENT OF 1983 AND THE SUBSEQUENT MIX OF STATUTE AND PRECEDENT THAT EFFECTIVELY BLOCKS PROPERTY OWNERS FROM A HEARING IN FEDERAL COURT. (RELATED CASE COLONY COVE). STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 9/23/11. DR HORTON - EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT IN LIGHT OF THE COSTS AND TIME ASSOCIATED WITH HANDLING LEGAL DISPUTES IN THE COURTS, MANY BUSINESSES ARE INCREASINGLY TURNING TO ARBITRATION AS A COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION. IN THIS CASE DR HORTON REQUIRED THAT EMPLOYEES BRING DISPUTES TO ARBITRATION. THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD RULED THAT THOSE AGREEMENTS ARE UNENFORCEABLE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 6/5/12. EEOC V. CRST VAN EXPEDITED - ATTORNEY FEES ASSESSED AGAINST EEOC U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 8TH CIRCUIT THE EEOC FILED A SERIES OF CLAIMS AGAINST TRUCKING COMPANY CRST VAN EXPEDITED, ALLEGING SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF FEMALE EMPLOYEES. THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED THE CASE, FINDING THE EEOC HAD FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND CONSOLIDATE INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS PRIOR TO BRINGING THE TITLE VII LAWSUIT. THE JUDGE DID NOT APPRECIATE THE EEOC'S LITIGATION STRATEGY OF 'SUE FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER' AND ISSUED AN ORDER REQUIRING THE EEOC TO PAY MORE THAN $4.5 MILLION DOLLARS IN COSTS AND ATTORNEYS FEES TO THE TRUCKING COMPANY. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ON 9/7/10. COURT VACATED ATTORNEYS' FEES AWARD 2/22/12. EEOC V. PEOPLEMARK - EEOC SUBPOENA POWER CHALLENGED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT THE APPELLATE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE IS AN APPROPRIATE REMEDY IN A TITLE VII ACTION BROUGHT BY THE EEOC WHERE THE AGENCY FAILED TO CONDUCT ANY INVESTIGATION OF THE UNDERLYING INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS OR ENGAGE IN MEANINGFUL CONCILIATION PRIOR TO FILING SUIT. THE COURT WILL ALSO CONSIDER WHETHER THE EEOC BE ORDERED TO PAY THE DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY'S FEES UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 6/7/12. EEOC V. TRICORE REFERENCE LABORATORIES - PROPERTY RIGHTS US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 10TH CIRCUIT EEOC FILED SUIT AGAINST TRICORE ALLEGING THAT THE COMPANY HAD FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR A DISABLED EMPLOYEE; HOWEVER, THE AGENCY PRESSED FORWARD WITH ITS LAWSUIT KNOWING FULL WELL THAT THE EMPLOYEE COULD NOT PERFORM ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS, EVEN WITH REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS. ACCORDINGLY, EEOC FAILED TO MAKE A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF DISCRIMINATION, AND IN PURSUING THE MATTER KNOWING THAT IT COULD NOT DO SO, IT INCURRED LIABILITY FOR TRICORE'S ATTORNEYS' FEES. ON APPEAL, WE ARGUE AS AMICUS THAT THE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY AWARDED ATTORNEY FEES TO TRICORE. STATUS: DECIDED. CIRCUIT COURT UPHELD DISTRICT COURT ATTORNEYS' FEES ON 8/16/12. ELKIN HILLS POWER V. CALIFORNIA - TAXATION OF INTANGIBLE PROPERTY 4TH APPELLATE DISTRICT NFIB URGED THE APPELLATE COURT TO REVIEW A LOWER COURT DECISION THAT, IN VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, PERMITTED THE TAXATION OF INTANGIBLE PROPERTY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS LETTER FILED ON 8/4/11. EXXONMOBIL V. NYC - CAUSATION IS ATTACKED BY DEFENDANT'S APPEAL COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT EXXON HAS APPEALED ITS $100 MILLION JURY VERDICT REGARDING MTBE. THE AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF EXXON MAINTAINS THAT THE ENTIRE AWARD WAS BASED ON HYPOTHETICAL DAMAGE THAT MIGHT OCCUR. THE BRIEF ARGUES THAT AN AWARD BASED ON A "IF THIS THEN THAT" FUTURE INJURY VIOLATES BASIC TORT PRINCIPLES OF CAUSATION AND COULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC IN THE PRODUCT LIABILITY ARENA. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 4/28/11.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V. PHOEBE PUTNEY HEALTH SYSTEM - LEGAL REFORM U.S. SUPREME COURT THIS CASE RAISES THE QUESTION OF WHETHER FEDERAL ANTITRUST LAWS APPLY TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ENGAGED IN BUSINESS PRACTICES. HERE THE DEFENDANT OPERATES UNDER A GRANT OF GENERAL CORPORATE POWER FROM A GEORGIA STATE HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ASSERTS THAT THE DEFENDANT VIOLATED ANTITRUST LAWS, BUT THE DEFENDANT ARGUES THAT THOSE LAWS CANNOT APPLY TO IT BECAUSE IT IS A QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY. GENERALLY QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, LIKE THE DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE, ARE DEEMED EXEMPT FROM ANTITRUST LAWS UNDER THE "STATE ACTION IMMUNITY DOCTRINE," SO LONG AS IT IS CLEAR THAT THEY ARE OPERATING IN THE FURTHERANCE OF A STATE POLICY, AND UNDER ACTIVE SUPERVISION FROM THE STATE. BUT, WE ARGUE THAT THERE CAN BE NO "STATE ACTION IMMUNITY" IN CASES LIKE THIS, WHEN THE QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL DEFENDANT IS UNQUESTIONABLY COMPETING WITH OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE MARKET. SMALL BUSINESSES ARE PUT AT A COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE WHEN TAXPAYER-FUNDED GOVERNMENT ACTORS OR QUASI-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES DIRECTLY COMPETE WITH PRIVATE BUSINESSES. NFIB BELIEVES THAT THE STATE ACTION IMMUNITY DOCTRINE ONLY APPLIES IF THE DEFENDANT ACTS TO ADVANCE LEGITIMATE REGULATORY POLICY, AS OPPOSED TO SOME POLICY OR PROGRAM DESIGNED SOLELY TO BENEFIT A PUBLIC ENTERPRISE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 8/27/12. FORD MOTOR CO. V. BOOMER - LEGAL REFORM VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT THE CASE WILL DETERMINE WHETHER ASBESTOS PLAINTIFFS CAN SUCCEED WITH THE "ANY FIBER IS GOOD ENOUGH" THEORY OF CAUSATION THAT ALLOWS EVEN THE MOST REMOTE DEFENDANTS TO BE DRAGGED INTO THE LITIGATION. THE SUBJECT CASE, BROUGHT BY A PLAINTIFF NAMED BOOMER, RESULTED IN A VERDICT AGAINST FORD AND HONEYWELL. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 7/3/12. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS ON 1/11/13. GEORGIA-PACIFIC WEST V. NEDC - REGULATORY U.S. SUPREME COURT THIS CASE CONCERNS AMBIGUITY IN THE CLEAN WATER ACT. SPECIFICALLY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHETHER THE CWA WAS INTENDED TO REQUIRE TIMBER HARVESTING COMPANIES TO OBTAIN NPDES PERMITS TO CONTROL STORMWATER FLOWS FROM FOREST ROADS. WE FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF TO ARGUE THAT EPA'S LONG-STANDING INTERPRETATIONS-EXEMPTING TIMBER BUSINESSES FROM THE NPDES PERMIT REGIME-SHOULD BE AFFORDED DEFERENCE BECAUSE EPA'S INTERPRETATION PRESERVES THE PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM ENTAILED IN THE NINTH AND TENTH AMENDMENTS. STATUS: PENDING. FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER 9/04/12. GENESIS HEALTHCARE AND ELDERCARE RESOURCES - WAGE AND HOUR (FLSA) SUPREME COURT OF UNITED STATES NFIB FILED AN AMICUS IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS OVER WHETHER AN EMPLOYER, HIT WITH A PROPOSED COLLECTIVE ACTION UNDER THE FLSA, CAN MOOT A CLAIM BY MAKING AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT (UNDER FRCP 68) BEFORE OTHER WORKERS HAVE THE CHANCE TO "OPT IN." STATUS: PENDING. FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER'S CERT PETITION ON 3/21/12. FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER'S MERITS BRIEF ON 9/6/12. GREATER ORLANDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE V. ORANGE CO. - LABOR & EMPLOYMENT CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NFIB MOVED TO INTERVENE IN THE ORLANDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S SUIT CHALLENGING A BALLOT INITIATIVE THAT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED EMPLOYERS TO OFFER PAID SICK LEAVE. SUBSEQUENT TO THE LAWSUIT TO ENJOIN THE INITIATIVE, THE LOCAL LEGISLATORS WITHDREW THE PROPOSAL. STATUS: DECIDED. INITIATIVE WAS WITHDRAWN BY LAWMAKERS. HARRIS V. QUINN - FORCED UNIONIZATION OF IL HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION THE STATE OF ILLINOIS OPERATES MEDICAID-WAIVER PROGRAMS THAT PAY FOR IN-HOME PERSONAL CARE FOR DISABLED INDIVIDUALS. THE INDIVIDUAL "PROVIDERS" ARE SELECTED AND EMPLOYED BY THE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES OR THEIR GUARDIANS AND ARE OFTEN RELATIVES OF THE DISABLED PERSONS. ILLINOIS IS COMPELLING THESE PROVIDERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THE SEIU AS THEIR EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE FOR BARGAINING WITH THE STATE OVER ITS MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT RATES AND BENEFITS FOR PERSONAL CARE. PLAINTIFFS ARE PROVIDERS WHO ASSERT THAT BY COMPELLING THEM TO ASSOCIATE WITH AN ORGANIZATION TO PETITION THE STATE FOR MORE BENEFITS, THE STATE IS VIOLATING THEIR RIGHTS TO FREE EXPRESSIVE ASSOCIATION UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON BEHALF OF NRTW 1/2/12. HORNE V. USDA - PROPERTY RIGHTS U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION AND MERITS UNDER THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AGREEMENT ACT OF 1937, RAISIN FARMERS MUST TURN OVER A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THEIR CROP (SOMETIMES REACHING PERCENTAGES AS HIGH AS 30 OR 47 PERCENT OF THE ANNUAL CROP) FOR BELOW-MARKET OR NO COMPENSATION IN EXCHANGE FOR THE "PRIVILEGE" OF SELLING THE REMAINDER ON THE OPEN MARKET. THE NINTH CIRCUIT DENIED FARMERS THE RIGHT TO APPROPRIATELY CONTEST MONETARY FINES IMPOSED ON THE FARMERS WHO ALLEGEDLY FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE SET-ASIDE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 8/27/12. COURT GRANTED CERT AND MERITS BRIEF FILED 1/16/13. HOWARD V. A.W. CHESTERTON, INC. - LEGAL REFORM PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT THE CASE INVOLVES A KEY ISSUE IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION TODAY - THE "ANY EXPOSURE" THEORY OF CAUSATION. THE PA SUPERIOR COURT AUTHORED ONE OF THE MORE THOUGHTFUL OPINIONS EXPLAINING WHY THIS THEORY BEING PROMOTED BY PAID EXPERTS FOR PLAINTIFFS IS "JUNK SCIENCE." PA LOWER COURTS ARE NOW TRYING TO UNDERMINE THIS DECISION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 12/17/12 INDUSTRIAL COMM'N OF ARIZONA V. MARTIN - WORKERS' COMPENSATION SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS NFIB HAS JOINED THE FIGHT AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING OF FUNDS FROM THE STATE'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION FUND. ON JANUARY 31, 2009 ARIZONA GOVERNOR JAN BREWER SIGNED SB 1001, WHICH SWEEPS OVER $4 MILLION FROM THE STATE'S SPECIAL FUND OF THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, THE FUND ESTABLISHED BY ARIZONA'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION STATUTE TO ENSURE INJURED WORKERS RECEIVE BENEFITS MAINLY IN CASES WHERE THE EMPLOYER IS UNINSURED OR THE INSURANCE CARRIER IS INSOLVENT. THESE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WERE USED TO BALANCE THE STATE'S BUDGET IN VIOLATION OF THE STATE'S CONSTITUTION AND WORKERS' COMPENSATION STATUTE THAT CLEARLY STATE THAT MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL FUND MAY ONLY BE USED TO COVER WORKERS. STATUS: DECIDED. MOTION TO INTERVENE GRANTED 1/5/10. COURT RULED 6/21/10 IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFFS THAT FUNDS WERE HELD IN TRUST. ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS OVERTURNED THE TRIAL COURT DECISION ON 12/3/12. IN RE CARD INTERCHANGE FEE CLASS ACTION - UNFAIR COMPETITION U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK NFIB FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF OPPOSING VISA/MASTERCARD'S PROPOSED SETTLEMENT IN AN INTERCHANGE FEE DISPUTE INVOLVING MERCHANTS AND CONSUMERS. NFIB CONTENDS THAT THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WOULD PUT SMALL BUSINESS AT A FURTHER DISADVANTAGE WHEN IT COMES TO NEGOTIATING INTERCHANGE FEES WITH BANKS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 11/19/12. IN RE MASS TORT PROGRAM - ASBESTOS REFORM PENNSYLVANIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY A BRIEF WAS SUBMITTED TO THE PHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CALLING ON THE COURT TO ADOPT REFORMS IN ASBESTOS AND MASS TORT CASES TO ADDRESS ITS "JUDICIAL HELLHOLE" IMAGE. THE COURT RESPONDED TO THE AMICUS BRIEF AND ADOPTED A NEW PROTOCOL FOR MASS TORT CASES THAT THE BRIEF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH RESPECT TO REVERSE BIFURCATION, DEFERRAL OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND LIMITING CONSOLIDATED TRIALS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 1/21/12. COURT ADOPTED AMICI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HANDLING ASBESTOS CLAIMS. SECOND AMICUS BRIEF SUBMITTED 6/1/12. IN RE NESTLE USA - TAX TEXAS SUPREME COURT BUSINESSES IN TEXAS ARGUE THAT THE STATE'S APPLICATION OF THE BUSINESS FRANCHISE TAX, ALSO KNOWN AS THE MARGINS TAX, DOES NOT TREAT "SIMILARLY SITUATED TAXPAYERS EQUALLY AND UNIFORMLY" AND THAT THE MARGINS TAX VIOLATES THE EQUAL AND UNIFORM CLAUSE OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. IN ADDITION, THE PLAINTIFFS ARGUE THAT NESTLE MUST FILE AS A MANUFACTURER AND PAY A HIGHER TAX RATE EVEN THOUGH IT HAS NO MANUFACTURING FACILITIES IN THE STATE AND THIS PRACTICE VIOLATES THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. IN ROUND TWO OF THIS DISPUTE, NESTLE HAS PAID THE TAX UNDER PROTEST AND FILED AN APPEAL REGARDING THE INIQUITIES OF THE TAX. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER 9/5/12. ORAL ARGUMENT HELD 9/18/12. COURT DISMISSED CHALLENGE ON 10/19/12. JANKEY V. LEE - ATTORNEY FEE AWARDS IN ADA LAWSUITS CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT VICTORY! THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER CALIFORNIA'S MANDATORY "PREVAILING PARTY" ATTORNEY'S FEE PROVISION REQUIRES A PREVAILING DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM WAS FRIVOLOUS BEFORE AN ATTORNEY'S FEE AWARD CAN BE MADE. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT FILED ON 1/7/11. ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR 10/2/12. COURT UPHELD ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARD ON 12/17/12.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		KIVALINA V. EXXONMOBIL - LEGAL REFORM/CLIMATE CHANGE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THE SUIT SEEKS MONETARY DAMAGES FROM VARIOUS ENERGY COMPANIES FOR THE ALLEGED DESTRUCTION OF KIVALINA, ALASKA BY CLIMATE CHANGE. THE SPECIFIC ISSUE IN THE CASE IS WHETHER THE PUBLIC NUISANCE CLAIMS SEEKING TO SUBJECT AMERICAN BUSINESS THAT EMIT CO2, METHANE AND OTHER SUCH GASSES TO LIABILITY FOR WEATHER-RELATED EVENTS ALLEGEDLY CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING VIOLATE THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE UNDER ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION. THE SUIT WAS DISMISSED BY THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 07/07/10. KLAIRMONT V. GRAINSBORO - LEGAL REFORM SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NFIB JOINED A COALITION OF INTERESTED GROUPS IN FILING AN AMICUS BRIEF ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS IN THIS CASE. OUR BRIEF ARGUED THAT LITIGANTS SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ADVANCE CLAIMS AGAINST BUSINESSES UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION STATUTES SEEKING COMPENSATION FOR PERSONAL INJURIES, WHICH ARE MORE APPROPRIATELY ADVANCED AS COMMON LAW TORT CLAIMS. STATUS: PENDING. FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS ON 3/30/12. KOONTZ V. ST. JOHNS RIVER MGMT. - PROPERTY RIGHTS U.S. SUPREME COURT THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT CAN BE HELD LIABLE FOR A TAKING WHEN IT REFUSES TO ISSUE A LAND-USE PERMIT ON THE BASIS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NOT ACCEDE TO A PERMIT CONDITION THAT VIOLATES THE ESSENTIAL NEXUS AND ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY TEST FROM NOLLAN V. CA COASTAL COMM. (1987) AND DOLAN V. CITY OF TIGARD (1994). STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 11/28/12. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 1/15/13. LAMONS GASKET CO. V. SWIU - NLRB OPENS DOOR TO MORE STEALTH CARD CHECK AGREEMENTS NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD IN A 3-2 DECISION ON AUGUST 27, THE BOARD VOTED TO REVIEW A LANDMARK 2007 CASE, DANA CORPORATION, IN WHICH IT GRANTED DISSENTING WORKERS THE RIGHT TO UNDO A SUCCESSFUL (I.E., EMPLOYER-RECOGNIZED) UNION CARD CHECK CAMPAIGN AND DEMAND A SECRET BALLOT ELECTION. PRIOR TO THIS DECISION, EMPLOYEES HAD NO WAY TO DEMAND AN ELECTION IF THE EMPLOYER AGREED TO RECOGNIZE A UNION BASED ON AUTHORIZATION CARDS. WORKERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY USED ELECTIONS TO KICK OUT UNWANTED UNIONS, DEMONSTRATING THE UNRELIABILITY OF CARD CHECK INSTANT ORGANIZING CAMPAIGNS. WORKERS FREQUENTLY SIGN UNION AUTHORIZATION CARDS DUE TO UNION ORGANIZERS' INTIMIDATING TACTICS OR EVEN OUTRIGHT LIES ABOUT WHAT SIGNING A CARD MEANS. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB FILED TWO AMICUS BRIEFS ON 11/1/10 IN SUPPORT OF PRESERVING DANA CORPORATION. LEWIS V. HUMBOLDT ACQUISITION CORP. - BURDEN OF PROOF FOR ADA CLAIMS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT THIS CASE TESTS THE STANDARDS FOR PROVING AN AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT CLAIM. NOW BEING HEARD EN BANC, THE COURT IS BEING ASKED TO REVERSE THE DISTRICT COURT AND THREE-JUDGE PANEL DECISIONS THAT HELD A PLAINTIFF MUST PROVE THAT HER DISABILITY WAS THE SOLE, RATHER THAN A MOTIVATING, REASON FOR THE DEFENDANT-EMPLOYER'S ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT DECISION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 8/10/11 IN SUPPORT OF THE EMPLOYER. COURT FOUND IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND REMANDED TO DISTRICT COURT FOR TRIAL. LOBATO V. COLORADO - DEFENDING TAX PAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR) LAW COLORADO SUPREME COURT IN 1992, COLORADO PASSED A TAX PAYER BILL OF RIGHTS ("TABOR"). UNDER TABOR, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CANNOT RAISE TAX RATES WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL AND CANNOT SPEND REVENUES COLLECTED UNDER EXISTING TAX RATES IF REVENUES GROW FASTER THAN THE RATE OF INFLATION AND POPULATION GROWTH, WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL. IN LOBATO, THE PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TABOR RENDERS THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM SO UNDERFUNDED THAT STUDENTS ARE DENIED AN ADEQUATE EDUCATION, IN VIOLATION OF THE STATE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE OF A "THOROUGH AND UNIFORM" SYSTEM. . STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF TABOR LAW ON 7/18/12. LOCKE V. KARASS - NONMEMBER UNION FEES U.S. SUPREME COURT IN LOCKE, THE COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER A NATIONAL UNION THAT FUNCTIONS AS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT FOR CERTAIN STATE EMPLOYEES CAN CHARGE LOCAL NONMEMBERS FOR LITIGATION EXPENSES, EVEN WHERE THE LITIGATION DOES NOT AFFECT THE LOCAL UNION. THE COURT HAS PREVIOUSLY HELD THAT UNIONS CAN CHARGE NONMEMBERS A SERVICE FEE TO COVER EXPENSES RELATED TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION, BUT CANNOT CHARGE NONMEMBERS TO SUPPORT POLITICAL OR IDEOLOGICAL EXPRESSION. STATUS: DECIDED. COURT RULED THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES A LOCAL UNION MAY CHARGE A NONMEMBER AN APPROPRIATE SHARE OF ITS CONTRIBUTION TO A NATIONAL UNION'S LITIGATION EXPENSES. LOCKE V. SHORE - REGULATORY RESTRICTION ON INTERIOR DESIGNER U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT NFIB JOINED A LAWSUIT THAT CHALLENGED A FLORIDA LAW THAT PROHIBITS PEOPLE FROM PRACTICING INTERIOR DESIGN UNLESS THEY FIRST GET THE GOVERNMENT'S PERMISSION. THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THEY SPEND SIX YEARS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS JUMPING THROUGH THE ARBITRARY HOOPS OF FLORIDA'S INTERIOR DESIGN LICENSING LAW. IN MARCH 2011, THE APPELLATE COURT UPHELD A DISTRICT COURT RULING THAT FOUND THE REGULATION CONSTITUTIONAL. THE RULING COMES DESPITE ADMISSIONS BY THE STATE THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF INTERIOR DESIGN POSES ANY THREAT TO THE PUBLIC. STATUS: DECIDED. COURT UPHELD THE REGULATION ON 3/2/11. U.S. SUPREME COURT DENIED REVIEW ON 1/9/12. MCCALL V. UNITED STATES - DEFENDING FLORIDA'S DAMAGES CAP FLORIDA SUPREME COURT THE U.S. ELEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS RECENTLY UPHELD FLORIDA'S NONECONOMIC DAMAGES CAP UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, SEE ESTATE OF MCCALL V. UNITED STATES, 2011 WL 2084069 (11TH CIR. MAY 27, 2011). THE CIRCUIT COURT CERTIFIED THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS ON 9/15/11. MCDONALD V. CITY HOSPITAL - CHALLENGE TO WEST VIRGINIA'S PUNITIVE DAMAGES CAP WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS NFIB JOINED A COALITION AMICUS BRIEF IN A CHALLENGE TO THE STATE'S CAP ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES FOR MEDICAL LIABILITY ACTIONS. THE COALITION ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE STATUTORY CAP ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES BECAUSE WITHOUT THEM THE DOOR WILL BE OPENED TO SUBJECTIVE, RUNAWAY NONECONOMIC DAMAGE AWARDS. STATUS: PENDING. ORAL ARGUMENTS HELD MARCH 8, 2011. MERRILL V. OHIO - PROPERTY RIGHTS OHIO SUPREME COURT THE CASE INVOLVES A CHALLENGE TO SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNERS' RIGHT TO EXCLUDE TRESPASSERS ON DRY BEACHES ABOVE THE WATER'S EDGE. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE NOT ONLY FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT FOR BUSINESSES ALONG LAKE ERIE WHO WANT TO BE ABLE TO EXCLUDE TRESPASSERS. THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURTS FOUND LARGELY IN FAVOR OF THE LANDOWNERS. THE OHIO DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES HAS NOW APPEALED TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 9/20/10. ORAL ARGUMENT HELD 2/1/11.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		METROPOLITAN MILWAUKEE ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCE V. CITY OF MILWAUKEE - MANDATED SICK LEAVE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MILWAUKEE COUNTY MILWAUKEE REQUIRED THAT ALL CITY BUSINESSES PROVIDE THEIR EMPLOYEES WITH PAID SICK LEAVE THROUGH THE PASSAGE OF A BINDING REFERENDUM. NFIB ARGUED THAT THE MEASURE INTERFERES WITH EMPLOYERS' RIGHTS TO NEGOTIATE MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL LABOR AGREEMENTS WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES AND IS AN ILLEGAL EXTENSION OF MILWAUKEE AUTHORITY INTO AREAS OF LAW RESERVED TO THE STATE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 01/28/09. CIRCUIT COURT GRANTED MMAC SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON OCTOBER 14, 2010. HOWEVER, THE COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED AND REMANDED THE CASE BACK TO THE CIRCUIT COURT ON MARCH 24, 2011. MICHIGAN BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL V. SNYDER - PLA AGREEMENTS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT IN JULY 2011, GOVERNOR SNYDER SIGNED THE "MICHIGAN FAIR & OPEN COMPETITION IN GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRUCTION ACT," WHICH PROHIBITS GOVERNMENT ENTITIES FROM AWARDING CONTRACTS WITH PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS (PLAS). MICHIGAN BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO SUED TO BLOCK THE LAW. IN FEBRUARY A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT DECLARED THE LAW INVALID FINDING IT IMPERMISSIBLY INTERFERES WITH THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT ("NLRA"). THE STATE APPEALED. THE ADVERSE IMPACTS OF GOVERNMENT-MANDATED PLAS ARE WELL SUPPORTED, AND MICHIGAN HAS JOINED A LARGE AND GROWING NUMBER OF STATES WHO HAVE DETERMINED THAT GOVERNMENT-MANDATED PLAS DO NOT SERVE THE STATES' INTERESTS. AFTER THE TRIAL COURT STRUCK DOWN THE FIRST LAW, THE LEGISLATURE PASSED AN AMENDED LAW TO CORRECT PERCEIVED DEFICIENCIES. THE TRIAL COURT STRUCK DOWN THE AMENDED LAW. A SECOND APPEAL FOLLOWED. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF LAW BANNING PLA'S ON 6/15/12. SECOND BRIEF FILED ON 1/22/13. MIMS V. ARROW FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. - LEGAL REFORM U.S. SUPREME COURT THE APPEAL STEMS FROM THE 11TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING THAT FEDERAL COURTS LACK SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OVER PRIVATE ACTIONS UNDER THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 47 U.S.C. 227. NFIB'S BRIEF DISCUSSES THE EXTORTION THAT SMALL BUSINESSES FACE WHEN THEY UNINTENTIONALLY VIOLATE A CONSUMER PROTECTION STATUTE, LIKE THE TCPA OR DO-NOT-FAX, AND THEN FACE A BARRAGE OF DEMAND LETTERS AND FORM COMPLAINTS FROM PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 10/28/11. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF MIMS ON 1/17/12. MULHALL V. UNITE HERE - UNION ORGANIZING U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT VICTORY! THE APPELLATE COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER THE ORGANIZING ASSISTANCE THAT INCLUDES LISTS OF INFORMATION ABOUT NONUNION EMPLOYEES, USE OF PRIVATE COMPANY PROPERTY FOR ORGANIZING, AND A GAG-CLAUSE ON COMPANY COMMUNICATIONS WITH ITS EMPLOYEES ABOUT UNIONIZATION ARE "THINGS OF VALUE," MAKING IT ILLEGAL UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS ACT FOR THE UNION TO DEMAND THEM. IF THE CASE IS SUCCESSFUL, IT WILL BE ILLEGAL IN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, AND ALABAMA (AND POTENTIALLY ELSEWHERE) FOR UNIONS TO DEMAND THAT FROM AN EMPLOYER. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MULHALL FILED 3/28/11. COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF MULHALL ON 1/19/12. NATIONAL ASSOC. OF HOMEBUILDERS V. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - ADMIN PROCEDURE CHALLENGE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NAHB HAS APPEALED A DECISION FROM THE D.C. DISTRICT COURT THAT HELD A PARTY MUST SHOW THERE IS "NO SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES" UNDER WHICH THE RULE BEING CHALLENGING IS VALID. IF UPHELD, THIS RESULT WILL MAKE IT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO BRING FACIAL CHALLENGES TO ANY REGULATION. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 4/11/11. NATIONAL RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION (NRA) V. DOL U.S. DISTRICT COURT NFIB JOINED A CASE CHALLENGING THE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING (NPRM) PROCEDURES USED TO ALTER "TIP CREDIT" DISCLOSURE REGULATIONS. TIP CREDITS ALLOW EMPLOYERS TO PAY EMPLOYEES RECEIVING TIPS UNDER MINIMUM WAGE AS LONG AS THE EMPLOYEE'S HOURLY WAGE AND TIPS EXCEEDS MINIMUM WAGE. THE RULEMAKING NOTICE CONTAINED VERY LIMITED CHANGES TO THE CURRENT REGULATIONS, YET THE PROMULGATED REGULATIONS REQUIRE EXTENSIVE ADDITIONAL TIP CREDIT DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYERS. THE NEW REGULATIONS REPRESENT A HUGE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN WITH COSTLY PENALTIES FOR FAILED COMPLIANCE FOR BUSINESSES. STATUS: PENDING. COMPLAINT FILED 6/16/11. NATSO, INC. V. 3 GIRLS ENTERTAINMENT U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION THE CASE CONCERNS THE USE OF OVERBROAD DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO SEEK TRADE ASSOCIATION COMMUNICATIONS WITH THEIR CORPORATE MEMBERS REGARDING LOBBYING STRATEGIES. THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDERED SUCH DISCLOSURES, A RULING IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH DECISIONS BY THE SUPREME COURT AND OTHER CIRCUIT COURTS. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB FILED AMICUS BRIEF ON 10/20/11. REVIEW DENIED ON 1/9/12. NEIMAN MARCUS GROUP AND LOCAL 1102 - MICRO UNION CHALLENGE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD THE NLRB GRANTED REVIEW OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR'S DECISION IN NEIMAN MARCUS GROUP, INC. D/B/A BERGDORF GOODMAN. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR RELIED ON THE MICRO UNION STANDARD ESTABLISHED IN SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE IN FINDING AN APPROPRIATE UNIT THAT WAS COMPOSED OF ONLY SALES ASSOCIATES IN THE WOMEN'S SHOE DEPARTMENT. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB FILED AMICUS BRIEF ON 6/13/12.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		NESTLE DREYER V. NLRB - MICRO UNION CHALLENGE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT ON DECEMBER 28, 2011, THE NLRB UPHELD A REGIONAL DIRECTOR'S UNIT DETERMINATION OF MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES AT NESTLE DREYER'S ICE CREAM PLANT. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR'S DECISION WAS BASED ON THE MICRO-UNION STANDARD FROM SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE. NESTLE-DREYER LOST THE ELECTION AND REFUSED TO BARGAIN. ON MAY 18, THE BOARD ISSUED A DECISION FINDING THE COMPANY COMMITTED A ULP BY DOING SO. NESTLE DRYER HAS APPEALED THE ULP DECISION TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT CHALLENGING THE MICRO UNION STANDARD. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB FILED AMICUS BRIEF ON 7/11/12. NESTLE V. COMBS - TAX TEXAS SUPREME COURT BUSINESSES IN TEXAS ARGUE THAT THE STATE'S APPLICATION OF THE BUSINESS FRANCHISE TAX, ALSO KNOWN AS THE MARGINS TAX, DOES NOT TREAT "SIMILARLY SITUATED TAXPAYERS EQUALLY AND UNIFORMLY." THE BUSINESSES BRINGING SUIT AGAINST THE STATE ARGUE THAT THE MARGINS TAX VIOLATES THE EQUAL AND UNIFORM CLAUSE OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. IN ADDITION, THE PLAINTIFFS ARGUE THAT NESTLE MUST FILE AS A MANUFACTURER AND PAY A HIGHER TAX RATE EVEN THOUGH IT HAS NO MANUFACTURING FACILITIES IN THE STATE AND THIS PRACTICE VIOLATES THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. STATUS: DECIDED. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER 01/04/12. COURT DISMISSED CASE FOR JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE ON 2/10/12. NOEL CANNING V. NLRB - LABOR U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT NOEL CANNING HAS CHALLENGED AN NLRB DECISION REQUIRING EMPLOYER TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH. IN DOING SO, THE COURT HAS BEEN ASKED TO INVALIDATE THE BOARD'S RECESS APPOINTMENTS. COALITION FOR DEMOCRATIC WORKFORCE JOINED WITH THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO INTERVENE ON BEHALF OF NOEL CANNING. STATUS: PENDING. MOTION TO INTERVENE FILED BY CDW ON 3/15/12. BRIEFING CONCLUDES 12/11/12. NORTHROP CORP. EMPLOYEE INS. BENEFIT PLANS V. UNITED STATES - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW U.S. SUPREME COURT CERT. PETITION THIS TAX CASE DEALS WITH THE IRS' FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT (APA) WHEN IT PROMULGATED A TEMPORARY REGULATION. THE CASE EXPANDS UPON THE ISSUES IN HOME CONCRETE V. UNITED STATES, IN WHICH NFIB FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN 2011. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER 7/25/12. POUNDERS V. ENSERCH E&C - LEGAL REFORM ARIZONA SUPREME COURT THE CASE INVOLVES CHOICE-OF-LAW AND APPLICATION OF NEW MEXICO'S STATUTE OF REPOSE FOR ASBESTOS CLAIMS ARISING FROM IMPROVEMENTS TO REAL PROPERTY. THE PLAINTIFF WAS EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS AT VARIOUS TIMES (1969-1974 AND 1977-1983) WHILE WORKING AS A WELDER IN NEW MEXICO. OVER TWO DECADES LATER, PLAINTIFF FILED A PERSONAL INJURY SUIT IN ARIZONA. THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS HELD THAT NEW MEXICO LAW GOVERNED BECAUSE PLAINTIFF'S "INJURY" TOOK PLACE IN NEW MEXICO AND NEW MEXICO HAS A MORE SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN HAVING ITS LAW APPLIED. IF ARIZONA LAW WERE FOUND TO APPLY, THE CLAIM COULD PROCEED BECAUSE ARIZONA'S STATUTE OF REPOSE ONLY APPLIES TO CONTRACT CLAIMS; IT DOES NOT APPLY TO PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH CLAIMS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 10/26/12. PPL MONTANA V. MONTANA - UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING OF PROPERTY U.S. SUPREME COURT THIS CASE STEMS FROM A MONTANA COURT DECISION REGARDING THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CERTAIN RIVERS. THE RESULT OF THE MONTANA DECISION IS THAT AFTER MORE THAN 100 YEARS, PRIVATE LANDOWNERS HAVE BEEN STRIPPED OF THEIR OWNERSHIP OF SO-CALLED NAVIGABLE RIVER PROPERTIES AND THE STATE IS CLAIMING MILLIONS IN RETROACTIVE RENT AND FEES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 9/7/2011 IN SUPPORT OF PROPERTY OWNERS. RANDAZZO V. JEFFERSON PARISH - TAX APPEAL PROCESS CHALLENGED LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT THIS CASE INVOLVES A SALES TAX DISPUTE WITH JEFFERSON PARISH. THE PARISH PROCEEDED WITH A COLLECTION ACTION WITHOUT GIVING THE TAXPAYER THE PROPER DUE PROCESS. THE LOWER COURT AGREED WITH THE TAXPAYER, BUT THE COURT OF APPEALS OVERTURNED THE RULING. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 2/13/12. RIGGS V. GEORGIA PACIFIC - ASBESTOS REFORM UTAH SUPREME COURT THE CASE INVOLVES INTERPRETATION OF UTAH'S 1986 LIABILITY REFORM ACT (LRA), WHICH ABOLISHED JOINT LIABILITY. THE LRA APPLIES PROSPECTIVELY, AND PLAINTIFF IS ARGUING SHE WAS "INJURED" WHEN SHE WAS EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS LONG AGO RATHER THAN WHEN SHE WAS DIAGNOSED WITH MESOTHELIOMA IN 2007. APPLICATION OF THE ACT TO POST-1986 EXPOSURES RATHER THAN POST-1986 DIAGNOSES IS EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT. SINCE PROBABLY EVERY UTAH ASBESTOS CASE INVOLVES PRE-1986 EXPOSURES, PLAINTIFF'S THEORY WOULD RESULT IN FULL JOINT LIABILITY BEING APPLIED EVERY TIME. THIS WOULD NOT ONLY NULLIFY THE LAW IN ALL UTAH ASBESTOS CASES BUT ALSO RESULT IN FULL JOINT LIABILITY BEING APPLIED IN ANY OTHER TOXIC TORT CASE INVOLVING A PRODUCT WITH A LONG LATENCY PERIOD. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 2/24/12. RITE AID - NLRB OPENS DOOR TO MORE STEALTH CARD CHECK AGREEMENTS IN A 3-2 DECISION ON AUGUST 27, THE BOARD VOTED TO REVIEW A LANDMARK 2007 CASE, DANA CORPORATION, IN WHICH IT GRANTED DISSENTING WORKERS THE RIGHT TO UNDO A SUCCESSFUL (I.E., EMPLOYER-RECOGNIZED) UNION CARD CHECK CAMPAIGN AND DEMAND A SECRET BALLOT ELECTION. PRIOR TO THIS DECISION, EMPLOYEES HAD NO WAY TO DEMAND AN ELECTION IF THE EMPLOYER AGREED TO RECOGNIZE A UNION BASED ON AUTHORIZATION CARDS. IN VOTING TO REVISIT THE DANA CASE, THE OBAMA NLRB HAS SIGNALED ITS INTENT TO DENY WORKERS THE ABILITY TO VOTE ACCORDING TO THEIR CONSCIENCE AND REMOVE AN UNWANTED UNION FROM THEIR WORKPLACE. NFIB HAS FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF WITH THE BOARD, URGING IT NOT TO REVOKE THE NEW PROTECTIONS ACCORDED TO WORKERS SWEPT INTO UNION RANKS THROUGH CARD CHECK FORCED UNIONISM. STATUS: PENDING. ROBINSON TOWNSHIP V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA - DEFENSE OF ACT 13 PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT ACT 13 WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY TO NAVIGATE LOCAL ZONING LAWS AND RESTRICTS MUNICIPALITIES FROM INTERFERING WITH DEVELOPMENT OF OIL AND GAS RESOURCES. NFIB SUPPORTS ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL GAS RESOURCES AND SUPPORTED ACT 13. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF COMMONWEALTH 9/4/12. ROUNDY'S - MEANING OF "DISCRIMINATION" IN NONEMPLOYEE ACCESS CASES NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD THE NLRB SOLICITED AMICUS BRIEFS TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE PROPER DEFINITION OF "DISCRIMINATION" IN CASES WHERE EMPLOYERS DENY NONEMPLOYEE UNION ORGANIZERS ACCESS TO THE EMPLOYER'S PROPERTY. THE NLRB'S INTERPRETATION OF THE CURRENT RULE FORCES BUSINESS OWNERS TO PERMIT UNION ORGANIZERS TO CONDUCT A BOYCOTT ON THE BUSINESS' PRIVATE PROPERTY. NFIB ARGUED THAT IT IS WRONG TO REQUIRE A BUSINESS OWNER TO ALLOW UNION ORGANIZERS ONTO THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARMING THE BUSINESS. SINCE BOYCOTTS ARE ESPECIALLY DEVASTATING TO SMALL BUSINESSES, THE BOARD'S CURRENT INTERPRETATION IMPERMISSIBLY INTRUDES ON BUSINESS OWNERS PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 1/7/11. SACKETT V. EPA - REGULATORY TAKING U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION AND MERITS BRIEF THE CASE CONCERNS A CLEAN WATER ACT VIOLATION THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ISSUED TO THE SACKETTS, LANDOWNERS IN IDAHO. EPA CLAIMS THE LAND IS SUBJECT TO THE CWA, AND WHEN THE SACKETTS PLACED FILL MATERIAL ON THE LOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOME, EPA ISSUED AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLIANCE ORDER DIRECTING THE SACKETTS TO REMOVE THE FILL AND RESTORE THE LOT TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION. A THREE-JUDGE PANEL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT RULED THEY CANNOT GET JUDICIAL REVIEW UNLESS THEY FIRST GO THROUGH THE LIKELY FUTILE PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR A FEDERAL WETLANDS PERMIT; A PROCESS THAT COULD TAKE YEARS AND COST TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 3/25/11. COURT ACCEPTED REVIEW AND MERITS BRIEF FILED ON 9/30/11.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CASES FOR 2012 (CONT.)		SCHLAUD V. SNYDER- FIGHTING THE FORCED UNIONIZATION OF HOME DAY-CARE WORKERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN THIS CASE CONCERNS THE COMPULSORY UNIONIZATION OF HOME DAY CARE PROVIDERS WHERE INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES WILL BE FORCED TO PAY UNION DUES AND SERVICE FEES TO NATIONAL UNIONS, BUT THEIR EMPLOYEES WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO ANY OF THE BENEFITS TRADITIONALLY SOUGHT BY EMPLOYEES WHO UNIONIZE. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED 3/17/11. SECRETARY OF LABOR V. VOLKS CONSTRUCTORS A/K/A AKM LLC V. SECRETARY OF LABOR - FIGHTING TO UPHOLD OSHA'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT THE NFIB LEGAL CENTER FILED A BRIEF ASKING OSHA'S REVIEW COMMISSION TO UPHOLD THE SIX-MONTH TIME LIMIT FOR OSHA TO ISSUE A CITATION FOR A RECORD-KEEPING VIOLATION. DESPITE THIS LAW, OSHA CONTINUES TO ISSUE CITATIONS FOR FAILING TO PROPERLY RECORD INJURIES IN ITS FORM 300 LOG FOR VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED UP TO FIVE YEARS AGO. THE NFIB LEGAL CENTER BELIEVES THAT MAKING SMALL BUSINESSES SPEND TIME AND MONEY TRYING TO RECALL THE FACTS AND FIND FORMER EMPLOYEES IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEFEND AGAINST STALE CLAIMS IS UNFAIR. STATUS: PENDING. NFIB AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 11/27/07. IN A 2-1 DECISION, THE COMMISSION AFFIRMED OSHA'S AUTHORITY TO PUNISH EMPLOYERS FOR RECORDKEEPING VIOLATIONS THAT OCCURRED UP TO FIVE YEARS BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE SIX-MONTH STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS GOVERNING SUCH RECORDKEEPING ERRORS, ON THE GROUNDS THAT IMPROPER RECORDKEEPING MAY CONSTITUTE A CONTINUING VIOLATION OF OSHA'S MANDATORY FIVE-YEAR RECORD RETENTION REGULATION. EMPLOYER APPEALED TO FEDERAL COURT. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 8/3/11. SEE'S CANDY SHOPS - WAGE AND HOUR (ROUNDING PRACTICES) CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT - PETITION FOR REVIEW CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL 4TH APPELLATE DISTRICT (REMANDED) THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT GRANTED SEE'S CANDY'S PETITION FOR REVIEW ON THE QUESTION OF WHETHER TIME ROUNDING POLICIES ARE LEGAL UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW. THE ISSUE WAS REMANDED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL WHERE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER FILED AN AMICUS ARGUING THAT CALIFORNIA LAW COMPORTS WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS ALLOWING TIME ROUNDING. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE EMPLOYER ON 4/10/12. SIMPKINS V. CSX TRANSPORTATION - WORKPLACE ASBESTOS EXPOSURE (PREMISES LIABILITY) SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS THE BRIEF ARGUES THAT PREMISES OWNERS, SUCH AS THE DEFENDANT RAILROAD, OWE NO LEGAL DUTY OF CARE TO REMOTE PLAINTIFFS ALLEGEDLY INJURED AS A RESULT OF SECONDHAND EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS OR OTHER SUBSTANCES EMITTED IN THE WORKPLACE. THE SUBJECT ACTION INVOLVES THE ESTATE OF A WOMAN WHO WAS ALLEGEDLY EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS CARRIED HOME ON THE PERSON AND CLOTHING OF HER FORMER HUSBAND, WHO WORKED FOR THE DEFENDANT'S PREDECESSOR RAILROAD FROM 1958 TO 1964. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF CSX TRANSPORTATION FILED 4/25/11. COURT DENIED AMICUS BRIEFS ON 5/31/11. SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE - NLRB DECIDES WHETHER "MICRO UNIONS" PERMITTED NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD THE NLRB WILL SOON DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT LABOR UNIONS WILL BE ALLOWED TO BREAK OFF DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF WORKFORCES INTO SMALL GROUPS TO ORGANIZE FIVE OR 10 WORKERS AT A TIME INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE WORKPLACE AT ONCE - OR ORGANIZE USING "MICRO UNIONS." THE "MICRO UNIONS" WOULD ESSENTIALLY ALLOW LABOR ORGANIZERS TO SECTION OFF COMPANY EMPLOYEES BY SPECIFIC JOB DESCRIPTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A UNION WERE TRYING TO ORGANIZE A RESTAURANT STAFF, LEADERS WOULD TARGET SERVERS, BUSBOYS, DISHWASHERS, COOKS AND HOSTESSES SEPARATELY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 3/7/11. SPIRIT AIRLINES V. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION - REGULATORY AND FIRST AMENDMENT U.S. SUPREME COURT - CERT PETITION IN 2012, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUED A REGULATION THAT REQUIRES AIRLINES TO LIST THE TOTAL FEE FOR A TICKET (INCLUDING TAXES) IN ON-LINE AND PRINT ADVERTISING. THE RULE ESSENTIALLY PROHIBITS AIRLINES FROM HIGHLIGHTING OR CRITICIZING MANDATORILY-IMPOSED TAXES. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 12/27/12. STATE OF FLORIDA V. HHS - NFIB SUES TO STOP HEALTH CARE LAW U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. SUPREME COURT ON MAY 14, 2010, NFIB JOINED THE MULTI-STATE LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. THE SUIT WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF NFIB BY THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LEGAL CLAIMS IN THE LAWSUIT, HOWEVER, NFIB IS PRIMARILY CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. NFIB STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT CONGRESS LACKS THE AUTHORITY TO FORCE AMERICANS TO PURCHASE A PRIVATE PRODUCT, SUCH AS HEALTH INSURANCE, OR FACE PAYING A PENALTY. ON JANUARY 31, 2011, FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGE ROGER VINSON RULED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IN THE HEALTHCARE LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. JUDGE VINSON ALSO FOUND THAT THE MANDATE CANNOT BE SEVERED FROM THE REST OF THE HEALTHCARE LAW, THE ENTIRE ACT MUST BE DECLARED VOID." STATUS: AFTER SUBSEQUENT APPEAL AND DECISION BY THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 11TH CIRCUIT, THE CASE MOVED TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. IN A DECISION ISSUED JUNE 28, 2012, THE COURT UPHELD THE HEALTHCARE LAW AND REJECTED NFIB'S CHALLENGE. TAYLOR V. EASTERN CONNECTION OPERATING, INC. - WAGE & HOUR SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS THIS CASE ISSUE INVOLVES THE POTENTIAL EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF THE MASSACHUSETTS WAGE ACT. THREE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS WHO RESIDE AND WORK IN NEW YORK SUED EASTERN CONNECTION IN MASSACHUSETTS. PLAINTIFFS SOUGHT TO PROSECUTE CLAIMS UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUTE, THE MINIMUM WAGE ACT, AND THE MINIMUM OVERTIME LAW. THE SUPERIOR COURT GRANTED EASTERN CONNECTION'S RULE 12(B) MOTION TO DISMISS ON THE GROUNDS THAT NEW YORK, RATHER THAN MASSACHUSETTS LAW APPLIES, BECAUSE "NONE OF THE PLAINTIFFS HAVE ANY CONTACT WITH MASSACHUSETTS OTHER THAN THROUGH THEIR EMPLOYMENT BY THE DEFENDANT." PLAINTIFFS APPEALED THE DISMISSAL, AND THE SJC HAS TAKEN THE APPEAL. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 11/30/12. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 1/8/13. U.S. V. HOME CONCRETE & SUPPLY, LLC - CHALLENGING RETROACTIVE IRS RULE U.S. SUPREME COURT THE COURT IS BEING ASKED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A FINAL REGULATION PROMULGATED BY THE IRS, WHICH REFLECTS THE IRS'S VIEW THAT AN UNDERSTATEMENT OF GROSS INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO AN OVERSTATEMENT OF BASIS CAN TRIGGER THE EXTENDED SIX-YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD, IS ENTITLED TO JUDICIAL DEFERENCE. THIS CASE WILL HAVE IMPORTANT RAMIFICATIONS ON THE LEVEL OF DEFERENCE IRS REGULATIONS RECEIVE, SINCE THE RULE ESSENTIALLY OVERTURNS EXISTING SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT AND APPLIES RETROACTIVELY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT ON 12/22/11. VANCE V. BALL STATE - TITLE VII LIABILITY U.S. SUPREME COURT NFIB FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF SUPPORTING DEFENDANT BALL STATE UNIVERSITY. PLAINTIFF FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE EEOC ALLEGING THAT COWORKERS AND AT LEAST ONE "SUPERVISOR" CREATED A HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT BY MAKING OFFENSIVE, RACIALLY CHARGED COMMENTS. THE STANDARDS CREATING EMPLOYER LIABILITY VARIES FOR SUPERVISORS AND CO-WORKERS, THUS THE CLAIM BOILED DOWN TO THE COURT'S DEFINITION OF "SUPERVISOR." THE 7TH CIRCUIT DECLINED TO ADOPT A BROADER DEFINITION OF "SUPERVISOR" THAT IS USED BY OTHER CIRCUIT COURTS, AND THE SUPREME COURT GRANTED CERTIORARI TO RESOLVE THE CIRCUIT SPLIT. IF THE SUPREME COURT ACCEPTS THE BROADER DEFINITION OF "SUPERVISOR," THE THREAT OF EMPLOYER LIABILITY AND FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION WOULD INCREASE. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED ON 10/26/12. ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR 11/26/12. WATTS V. COX MEDICAL CENTER - DAMAGE CAP MISSOURI SUPREME COURT THE COURT HAS BEEN ASKED TO DETERMINE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF MISSOURI'S DAMAGES CAP. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 12/30/11. WHITING V. CBS CORP. AND CRANE CO. - DUTY TO WARN OF ASBESTOS DANGER COMMONWEALTH OF MASS. APPEALS COURT THE COURT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER THE DEFENDANTS HAD A DUTY TO WARN OF THE ASBESTOS-RELATED HAZARDS IN REPLACEMENT GASKETS AND PACKING AND EXTERNAL INSULATION MADE BY THIRD PARTIES AND INSTALLED BY THE NAVY. STATUS: PENDING. AMICUS BRIEF FILED 6/8/12.
FORM 990 PROVIDED TO GOVERNING BODY	PART VI, SECTION B: POLICIES, LINE 11	FOLLOWING AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, A DRAFT OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S FORM 990 IS PREPARED. THIS FORM 990 IS REVIEWED INTERNALLY BY NFIB'S TAX ACCOUNTANT, CONTROLLER/TREASURER, AND SVP/CFO. ANY QUESTIONS ARISING FROM THE INITIAL REVIEW ARE ADDRESSED TO ENSURE THE RETURN IS COMPLETE AND ACCURATE. ANY NECESSARY CHANGES/CORRECTIONS ARE MADE ON THE FORM 990 AND THE RETURN AGAIN GOES THROUGH NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S INTERNAL REVIEW PROCESS. UPON APPROVAL OF THE SVP/CFO, THE FINAL RETURN IS FILED WITH THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. THE FINAL RETURN IS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR REVIEW.
WRITTEN CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY	PART VI, SECTION B: POLICIES, LINE 12	EVERY BOARD MEMBER, OFFICER, AND KEY EMPLOYEE OF NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER IS REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE ANY ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
PROCESS OF DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR OFFICERS AND OTHER KEY EMPLOYEES	PART VI, SECTION B: POLICIES, LINE 15	THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND SVP OF THE ORGANIZATION. THE TREASURER'S AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S COMPENSATION IS REVIEWED AND SET BY THE CEO. IN NOVEMBER 2011, AN OUTSIDE COMPENSATION CONSULTING FIRM WAS ENGAGED TO PROVIDE EXPERT ANALYSES REGARDING THE REASONABLENESS OF THE TOTAL COMPENSATION PACKAGE FOR THE EXECUTIVES OF NFIB AND ITS AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS. THE 2011-2012 RESULTS ALONG WITH AN IRC 4958 OPINION LETTER WERE PROVIDED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD FOR THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AT THE FEBRUARY 2012 MEETING. THE COMMITTEE RELIES ON THIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT REASONABLE COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND SVP. THE COMMITTEE'S PHILOSOPHY IS TO ENSURE THAT THE COMPENSATION FOR THESE POSITIONS RELATIVE TO MARKET COMPARISONS IS COMPETITIVE IN ORDER TO ATTRACT, RETAIN AND MOTIVATE QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES WHILE NOT BEING AT THE TOP OF THE RANGE. THE COMMITTEE SETS THE COMPENSATION FOR THE CEO, CFO, SECRETARY AND SVP EACH YEAR DURING THEIR MEETING WHICH IS TYPICALLY HELD IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY. MINUTES FROM THESE ANNUAL MEETINGS ARE TAKEN BY THE CORPORATE SECRETARY DURING THE MEETING. WHEN THE MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED, THEY ARE RETAINED WITH ALL OTHER CORPORATE RECORDS.
DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC	PART VI, SECTION C: DISCLOSURE, LINE 19	IT IS NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S ("THE CENTER") POLICY TO MAKE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION, UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON, ITS EXEMPTION APPLICATION, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND ANY LETTER OR DOCUMENT ISSUED BY THE IRS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION. THE CENTER ALSO MAKES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION AND COPYING, UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON, ITS FEDERAL FORM 990, RETURN OF ORGANIZATION EXEMPT FROM INCOME TAX. THE FORM 990 IS AVAILABLE FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING WITH THE DUE DATE OF THE RETURN (INCLUDING ANY EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING). THE FOUNDATION'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST, EITHER WRITTEN OR IN PERSON.
OTHER FEES FOR SERVICES FOR NON-EMPLOYEES	FORM 990 PART IX LINE 11G	DESCRIPTION:PUBLIC RELATIONS TOTAL FEES:236123
OTHER FEES FOR SERVICES FOR NON-EMPLOYEES	FORM 990 PART IX LINE 11G	DESCRIPTION:OTHER EXPENSES TOTAL FEES:92259

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 51056K

Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2012

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE R
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Related Organizations and Unrelated Partnerships

Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 33, 34, 35, 36, or 37.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990. MediumBullet

See separate instructions.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2012

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER

Employer identification number

62-1570449

Part I

Identification of Disregarded Entities (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 33.)

(a) Name, address, and EIN (if applicable) of disregarded entity	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Total income	(e) End-of-year assets	(f) Direct controlling entity

Part II

Identification of Related Tax-Exempt Organizations (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 34 because it had one or more related tax-exempt organizations during the tax year.)

(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Exempt Code section	(e) Public charity status (if section 501(c)(3))	(f) Direct controlling entity	(g) Section 512(b)(13) controlled entity?
(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Exempt Code section	(e) Public charity status (if section 501(c)(3))	(f) Direct controlling entity	Yes	No
(1) NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUS 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN37214 94-0707299	MEM. REPRES.	CA	501(C)(6)	N/A	NA		No
(2) NFIB RESEARCH FOUNDATION 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN37214 04-3592337	RESEARCH	TN	501(C)(3)	SUP. ORG. I	NFIB	Yes
(3) NFIB YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR FOUNDATION 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN37214 62-1557196	EDUCATION	TN	501(C)(3)	SUP. ORG. I	NFIB	Yes
(4) NFIB SAVE AMERICAS FREE ENTERPRISE TRUST 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN37214 94-2532364	PAC	CA	527	N/A	NFIB	Yes
(5) NFIB THE VOICE OF FREE ENTERPRISE 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN37214 27-3615830	SOC. WELFARE	TN	501(C)(4)	N/A	NFIB	Yes

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 50135Y

Schedule R (Form 990) 2012

Page 2

Part III

Identification of Related Organizations Taxable as a Partnership (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 34 because it had one or more related organizations treated as a partnership during the tax year.)

(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Direct controlling entity	(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	(h) Disproprtionate allocations?		(i) Code VUBI amount in box 20 of Schedule K-1 (Form 1065)	(j) General or managing partner?
(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Direct controlling entity	(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	Yes	No	(i) Code VUBI amount in box 20 of Schedule K-1 (Form 1065)	Yes	No

Part IV

Identification of Related Organizations Taxable as a Corporation or Trust (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 34 because it had one or more related organizations treated as a corporation or trust during the tax year.)

(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Direct controlling entity	(e) Type of entity (C corp, S corp, or trust)	(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	(i) Section 512(b)(13) controlled entity?
(a) Name, address, and EIN of related organization	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(d) Direct controlling entity	(e) Type of entity (C corp, S corp, or trust)	(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	Yes	No
(1) NFIB MEMBER SERVICES CORPORATION 53 CENTURY BLVD SUITE 250 NASHVILLE,TN372143682 94-2899404	MEMBER BENEFITS	CA	NA	C			Yes

Schedule R (Form 990) 2012

Page 3

Part V

Transactions With Related Organizations (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 34, 35b, or 36.)

Note. Complete line 1 if any entity is listed in Parts II, III, or IV of this schedule.

Yes

1 During the tax year, did the orgranization engage in any of the following transactions with one or more related organizations listed in Parts II-IV?

a Receipt of (i) interest (ii) annuities (iii) royalties or (iv) rent from a controlled entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

b Gift, grant, or capital contribution to related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

c Gift, grant, or capital contribution from related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes

d Loans or loan guarantees to or for related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

e Loans or loan guarantees by related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

f Dividends from related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

g Sale of assets to related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

h Purchase of assets from related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

i Exchange of assets with related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

j Lease of facilities, equipment, or other assets to related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

k Lease of facilities, equipment, or other assets from related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l Performance of services or membership or fundraising solicitations for related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

m Performance of services or membership or fundraising solicitations by related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

n Sharing of facilities, equipment, mailing lists, or other assets with related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes

o Sharing of paid employees with related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes

p Reimbursement paid to related organization(s) for expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes

q Reimbursement paid by related organization(s) for expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes

r Other transfer of cash or property to related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

s Other transfer of cash or property from related organization(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

If the answer to any of the above is "Yes," see the instructions for information on who must complete this line, including covered relationships and transaction thresholds.

(a) Name of other organization	(b) Transaction type (a-s)	(c) Amount involved	(d) Method of determining amount involved
(1) NFIB THE VOICE OF FREE ENTERPRISE	LINE	388,440	FMV
(2) NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS	LINE	117,158	FMV
(3) NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS	LINE	202,581	FMV

Schedule R (Form 990) 2012

Page 4

Part VI

Unrelated Organizations Taxable as a Partnership (Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 37.)

Provide the following information for each entity taxed as a partnership through which the organization conducted more than five percent of its activities (measured by total assets or gross revenue) that was not a related organization. See instructions regarding exclusion for certain investment partnerships.

(a) Name, address, and EIN of entity	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	(e) Are all partners section 501(c)(3) organizations?		(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	(h) Disproprtionate allocations?		(i) Code VUBI amount in box 20 of Schedule K-1 (Form 1065)	(j) General or managing partner?
(a) Name, address, and EIN of entity	(b) Primary activity	(c) Legal domicile (state or foreign country)	Yes	No	(f) Share of total income	(g) Share of end-of-year assets	Yes	No	(i) Code VUBI amount in box 20 of Schedule K-1 (Form 1065)	Yes	No

Schedule R (Form 990) 2012

Page 5

Part VII

Supplemental Information

Complete this part to provide additional information for responses to questions on Schedule R (see instructions).

Identifier	Return Reference	Explanation

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

1	Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities: THE NFIB SMALL BUSINESS LEGAL CENTER'S MISSION IS TO BE THE VOICE FOR SMALL BUSINESS IN THE NATION'S COURTS AND THE LEGAL RESOURCE FOR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS NATIONWIDE.
2	Check this box
3	Number of voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1a) ........	3	14
4	Number of independent voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1b) .....	4	13
5	Total number of individuals employed in calendar year 2011 (Part V, line 2a) ......	5	3
6	Total number of volunteers (estimate if necessary) .............	6	20
7a	Total unrelated business revenue from Part VIII, column (C), line 12 ........	7a	0
b	Net unrelated business taxable income from Form 990-T, line 34 .........	7b	0

		Prior Year	Current Year
8	Contributions and grants (Part VIII, line 1h) .........	3,108,877	2,080,333
9	Program service revenue (Part VIII, line 2g) .........	0	0
10	Investment income (Part VIII, column (A), lines 3, 4, and 7d ) ....	551	359
11	Other revenue (Part VIII, column (A), lines 5, 6d, 8c, 9c, 10c, and 11e)	0	0
12	Total revenue—add lines 8 through 11 (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12)...................	3,109,428	2,080,692
13	Grants and similar amounts paid (Part IX, column (A), lines 1–3 )...	0	0
14	Benefits paid to or for members (Part IX, column (A), line 4).....	0	0
15	Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits (Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10)	541,732	617,955
16a	Professional fundraising fees (Part IX, column (A), line 11e).....	10,280	37,249
b	Total fundraising expenses (Part IX, column (D), line 25) 252,926
17	Other expenses (Part IX, column (A), lines 11a–11d, 11f–24e)....	2,404,307	1,455,103
18	Total expenses. Add lines 13–17 (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25)	2,956,319	2,110,307
19	Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 18 from line 12.......	153,109	-29,615
		Beginning of Current Year	End of Year
20	Total assets (Part X, line 16).............	700,084	394,797
21	Total liabilities (Part X, line 26).............	376,636	100,964
22	Net assets or fund balances. Subtract line 21 from line 20.....	323,448	293,833

Sign Here

	Signature of officer	Date

	Type or print name and title


4a	(Code: ) (Expenses $ 1,817,437 including grants of $ 0 ) (Revenue $ 0 )
	SEE SCHEDULE O FOR SUMMARY OF 2012 CASES

4b	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4c	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4d	Other program services (Describe in Schedule O.)
	(Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
4e	Total program service expenses1,817,437

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)			(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations
(A) Name and Title
(18) SUSAN M ECKERLY........................................................................ SVP	1.0 .......................39.0	X		0	326,872	30,024
(19) KAREN R HARNED........................................................................ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR	40.0 .......................0.0	X		220,587	0	16,815
(20) BETH MILITO........................................................................ SENIOR EXECUTIVE COUNSEL	40.0 .......................0.0		X	177,275	0	7,103

1b	Sub-Total................
c	Total from continuation sheets to Part VII, Section A....
d	Total (add lines 1b and 1c)............	397,862	2,228,021	161,434

(A) Name and business address	(B) Description of services	(C) Compensation
JONES DAY, 51 LOUISIANA AVE NWWASHINGTONDC20001	LEGAL SERVICE	634,270
CREATIVE RESPONSE CONCEPTS, 2760 EISENHOWER AVE 4TH FLOORALEXANDRIAVA22314	PUBLIC RELATIONS	236,123



2 Total number of independent contractors (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization 2

				(A) Total revenue	(B) Related or exempt function revenue	(C) Unrelated business revenue	(D) Revenue excluded from tax under sections 512, 513, or 514
1a	Federated campaigns..1a
b	Membership dues....1b
c	Fundraising events....1c
d	Related organizations...1d		388,440
e	Government grants (contributions)1e

f	All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts not included above1f		1,691,893

g	Noncash contributions included in lines 1a-1f:$
h	Total. Add lines 1a-1f.......			2,080,333
			Business Code
2a
b
c
d
e
f	All other program service revenue .
g	Total. Add lines 2a–2f........			0
3	Investment income (including dividends, interest, and other similar amounts).......			359	0	0	359
4	Income from investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds..			0
5	Royalties...........			0
		(i) Real	(ii) Personal
6a	Gross rents
b	Less: rental expenses
c	Rental income or (loss)	0	0
d	Net rental income or (loss).......			0
		(i) Securities	(ii) Other
7a	Gross amount from sales of assets other than inventory
b	Less: cost or other basis and sales expenses
c	Gain or (loss)
d	Net gain or (loss)..........			0
8a	Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ of contributions reported on line 1c). See Part IV, line 18 ..
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from fundraising events..			0
9a	Gross income from gaming activities. See Part IV, line 19 ...
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from gaming activities...			0
10a	Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances .
	a
b	Less: cost of goods sold ..b
c	Net income or (loss) from sales of inventory..			0
Miscellaneous Revenue			Business Code
11a
b
c
d	All other revenue ....
e	Total. Add lines 11a–11d ......			0
12	Total revenue. See Instructions......			2,080,692	0	0	359


			(A) Beginning of year		(B) End of year
1	Cashnon-interest-bearing .............		0	1	0
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........		572,932	2	375,664
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........		8,798	3	15,030
4	Accounts receivable, net .............		541	4	0
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
			0	5	0
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
			0	6	0
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............		0	7	0
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............		0	8	0
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........		0	9	0
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b	0	10c
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........		0	11	0
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....		0	12	0
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....		0	13	0
14	Intangible assets ...............		0	14	0
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........		117,813	15	4,103
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......		700,084	16	394,797
17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........		341,119	17	70,211
18	Grants payable .................		0	18	0
19	Deferred revenue ................		0	19	0
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............		0	20	0
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..		0	21	0
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........		0	22	0
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..		0	23	0
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....		0	24	0
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................		35,517	25	30,753
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........		376,636	26	100,964
	Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............		323,448	27	293,833
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........		0	28	0
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........		0	29	0
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........			30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....			31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds			32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........		323,448	33	293,833
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........		700,084	34	394,797