TY 2022 Form 990EZ

(a) Name and title	(b) Average hours per week devoted to position	(c) Reportable compensation (Forms W-2/1099-MISC) (if not paid, enter -0-)	(d) Health benefits, contributions to employee benefit plans, and deferred compensation
SCOTT ROSENOW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR	38.00	124,644	9,074
JAMES BUCHEN CHAIR OF THE BOARD	1.00	0	0
SCOTT MANLEY VICE CHAIRPERSON	2.00	0	0
ANDREW COOK SECRETARY	1.00	0	0
JASON CULOTTA TREASURER (FROM 10/2022)	1.00	0	0
NICKOLAS GEORGE TREASURER (THRU 10/2022)	1.00	0	0
LAURIE FISCHER DIRECTOR	1.00	0	0
KURT BAUER DIRECTOR	1.00	0	0

- TIN:

SCHEDULE A
(Form 990)

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.
right arrow

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

Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2022

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

WMC LITIGATION CENTER INC

Employer identification number

27-3090500

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 12, 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 (Form 990).)

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 agricultural research organization described in 170(b)(1)(A)(ix) operated in conjunction with a land-grant college or university or a non-land grant college of agriculture. See instructions. Enter the name, city, and state of the college or university:

An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 33 1/3% 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 33 1/3% 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 on lines 12a through 12d that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 12e, 12f, and 12g.

Type I. A supporting organization operated, supervised, or controlled by its supported organization(s), typically by giving the supported organization(s) the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the directors or trustees of the supporting organization. You must complete Part IV, Sections A and B.

Type II. A supporting organization supervised or controlled in connection with its supported organization(s), by having control or management of the supporting organization vested in the same persons that control or manage the supported organization(s). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and C.

Type III functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with, and functionally integrated with, its supported organization(s) (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A, D, and E.

Type III non-functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with its supported organization(s) that is not functionally integrated. The organization generally must satisfy a distribution requirement and an attentiveness requirement (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and D, and Part V.

Check this box if the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, Type III functionally integrated, or Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organization.

Enter the number of supported organizations ...............................

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

(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	(iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document?		(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)
(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	Yes	No	(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)


Total

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

Cat. No. 11285F

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

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 failed to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grant.") ..	26,187	50,055	53,000	270,548	140,000	539,790
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	26,187	50,055	53,000	270,548	140,000	539,790
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) ..						325,336
6	Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.						214,454

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
7	Amounts from line 4..	26,187	50,055	53,000	270,548	140,000	539,790
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 VI.)..
11	Total support. Add lines 7 through 10						539,790

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

First 5 years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here ........................................ right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2022 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) .........

39.730 %

Public support percentage for 2020 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 ...............

45.880 %

16a

33 1/3% support test—2022. 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—2021. 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—2022. 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 VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ............ right arrow

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2021. 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 VI 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) 2022

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 10 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) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(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) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(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 on 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 VI.) ..
13	Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.)..

First 5 years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here................................................. right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2022 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage from 2021 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 ...............

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage

Investment income percentage for 2022 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) ......

Investment income percentage from 2021 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 .............

19a

33 1/3% support tests-2022. 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—2021. 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) 2022

Page 4

Part IV

Supporting Organizations

(Complete only if you checked a box on line 12 of Part I. If you checked box 12a, of Part I, complete Sections A and B. If you checked box 12b, of Part I, complete Sections A and C. If you checked box 12c, of Part I, complete Sections A, D, and E. If you checked box12d, of Part I, complete Sections A and D, and complete Part V.)

Section A. All Supporting Organizations

Yes

Are all of the organization’s supported organizations listed by name in the organization’s governing documents?
If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organizations are designated. If designated by class or purpose,
describe the designation. If historic and continuing relationship, explain.

Did the organization have any supported organization that does not have an IRS determination of status under section 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how the organization determined that the supported organization was described in section 509(a)(1) or (2).

Did the organization have a supported organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6)? If "Yes," answer lines 3b and 3c below.

Did the organization confirm that each supported organization qualified under section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) and satisfied the public support tests under section 509(a)(2)? If "Yes," describe in Part VI when and how the organization made the determination.

Did the organization ensure that all support to such organizations was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization put in place to ensure such use.

Was any supported organization not organized in the United States ("foreign supported organization")? If “Yes” and if you checked box 12a or 12b in Part I, answer lines 4b and 4c below.

Did the organization have ultimate control and discretion in deciding whether to make grants to the foreign supported organization? If “Yes,” describe in Part VI how the organization had such control and discretion despite being controlled or supervised by or in connection with its supported organizations.

Did the organization support any foreign supported organization that does not have an IRS determination under sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1) or (2)? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI what controls the organization used to ensure that all support to the foreign supported organization was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes.

Did the organization add, substitute, or remove any supported organizations during the tax year? If “Yes,” answer lines 5b and 5c below (if applicable). Also, provide detail in Part VI, including (i) the names and EIN numbers of the supported organizations added, substituted, or removed; (ii) the reasons for each such action; (iii) the authority under the organization's organizing document authorizing such action; and (iv) how the action was accomplished (such as by amendment to the organizing document).

Type I or Type II only. Was any added or substituted supported organization part of a class already designated in the organization's organizing document?

Substitutions only. Was the substitution the result of an event beyond the organization's control?

Did the organization provide support (whether in the form of grants or the provision of services or facilities) to anyone other than (i) its supported organizations, (ii) individuals that are part of the charitable class benefited by one or more of its supported organizations, or (iii) other supporting organizations that also support or benefit one or more of the filing organization’s supported organizations? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did the organization provide a grant, loan, compensation, or other similar payment to a substantial contributor (defined in section 4958(c)(3)(C)), a family member of a substantial contributor, or a 35% controlled entity with regard to a substantial contributor? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990) .

Did the organization make a loan to a disqualified person (as defined in section 4958) not described on line 7? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990).

Was the organization controlled directly or indirectly at any time during the tax year by one or more disqualified persons, as defined in section 4946 (other than foundation managers and organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or (2))? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did one or more disqualified persons (as defined on line 9a) hold a controlling interest in any entity in which the supporting organization had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did a disqualified person (as defined on line 9a) have an ownership interest in, or derive any personal benefit from, assets in which the supporting organization also had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

10a

Was the organization subject to the excess business holdings rules of section 4943 because of section 4943(f) (regarding certain Type II supporting organizations, and all Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations)? If “Yes,” answer line 10b below.

10a

Did the organization have any excess business holdings in the tax year? (Use Schedule C, Form 4720, to determine whether the organization had excess business holdings).

10b

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 5

Part IV

Supporting Organizations (continued)

Yes

Has the organization accepted a gift or contribution from any of the following persons?

A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described on lines 11b and 11c below, the governing body of a supported organization?

11a

A family member of a person described on 11a above?

11b

A 35% controlled entity of a person described on line 11a or 11b above? If “Yes” to 11a, 11b, or 11c, provide detail in Part VI.

11c

Section B. Type I Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the officers, directors, trustees, or membership of one or more supported organizations have the power to regularly appoint or elect at least a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees at all times during the tax year? If “No,” describe in Part VI how the supported organization(s) effectively operated, supervised, or controlled the organization’s activities. If the organization had more than one supported organization, describe how the powers to appoint and/or remove directors or trustees were allocated among the supported organizations and what conditions or restrictions, if any, applied to such powers during the tax year.

Did the organization operate for the benefit of any supported organization other than the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI how providing such benefit carried out the purposes of the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised or controlled the supporting organization.

Section C. Type II Supporting Organizations

Yes

Were a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees during the tax year also a majority of the directors or trustees of each of the organization’s supported organization(s)? If “No,” describe in Part VI how control or management of the supporting organization was vested in the same persons that controlled or managed the supported organization(s).

Section D. All Type III Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the organization provide to each of its supported organizations, by the last day of the fifth month of the organization’s tax year, (i) a written notice describing the type and amount of support provided during the prior tax year, (ii) a copy of the Form 990 that was most recently filed as of the date of notification, and (iii) copies of the organization’s governing documents in effect on the date of notification, to the extent not previously provided?

Were any of the organization’s officers, directors, or trustees either (i) appointed or elected by the supported organization(s) or (ii) serving on the governing body of a supported organization? If "No," explain in Part VI how the organization maintained a close and continuous working relationship with the supported organization(s).

By reason of the relationship described in line 2 above, did the organization’s supported organizations have a significant voice in the organization’s investment policies and in directing the use of the organization’s income or assets at all times during the tax year? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role the organization’s supported organizations played in this regard.

Section E. Type III Functionally-Integrated Supporting Organizations

Check the box next to the method that the organization used to satisfy the Integral Part Test during the year (see instructions):

The organization satisfied the Activities Test. Complete line 2 below.

The organization is the parent of each of its supported organizations. Complete line 3 below.

The organization supported a governmental entity. Describe in Part VI how you supported a government entity (see instructions)

Activities Test. Answer lines 2a and 2b below.

Yes

Did substantially all of the organization’s activities during the tax year directly further the exempt purposes of the supported organization(s) to which the organization was responsive? If "Yes," then in Part VI identify those supported organizations and explain how these activities directly furthered their exempt purposes, how the organization was responsive to those supported organizations, and how the organization determined that these activities constituted substantially all of its activities.

Did the activities described on line 2a, above constitute activities that, but for the organization’s involvement, one or more of the organization’s supported organization(s) would have been engaged in? If "Yes," explain in Part VI the reasons for the organization’s position that its supported organization(s) would have engaged in these activities but for the organization’s involvement.

Parent of Supported Organizations. Answer lines 3a and 3b below.

Did the organization have the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the officers, directors, or trustees of each of the supported organizations?If "Yes" or "No", provide details in Part VI.

Did the organization exercise a substantial degree of direction over the policies, programs and activities of each of its supported organizations? If "Yes," describe in Part VI. the role played by the organization in this regard.

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 6

Part V

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations

Check here if the organization satisfied the Integral Part Test as a qualifying trust on Nov. 20, 1970 (explain in Part VI). See instructions. All other Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations must complete Sections A through E.

	Section A - Adjusted Net Income		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Net short-term capital gain	1
2	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	2
3	Other gross income (see instructions)	3
4	Add lines 1 through 3	4
5	Depreciation and depletion	5
6	Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions)	6
7	Other expenses (see instructions)	7
8	Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4)	8

	Section B - Minimum Asset Amount		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year):	1
a	Average monthly value of securities	1a
b	Average monthly cash balances	1b
c	Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets	1c
d	Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c)	1d
e	Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI):
2	Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets	2
3	Subtract line 2 from line 1d	3
4	Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 0.015 of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions).	4
5	Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3)	5
6	Multiply line 5 by 0.035	6
7	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	7
8	Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6)	8

	Section C - Distributable Amount		Current Year
1	Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A)	1
2	Enter 85% of line 1	2
3	Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A)	3
4	Enter greater of line 2 or line 3	4
5	Income tax imposed in prior year	5
6	Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions)	6

Check here if the current year is the organization's first as a non-functionally-integrated Type III supporting organization (see instructions)

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 7

Part V

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations(continued)

Section D - Distributions		Current Year
1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes	1
2 Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity	2
3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations	3
4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets	4
5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required - provide details in Part VI)	5
6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions	6
7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6.	7
8 Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions	8
9 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6	9
10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount	10

Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions)		(i) Excess Distributions	(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2022	(iii) Distributable Amount for 2022
1 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6
2 Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2022 (reasonable cause required-- explain in Part VI). See instructions.
3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2022:
a From 2017.......
b From 2018.......
c From 2019.......
d From 2020.......
e From 2021.......
fTotal of lines 3a through e
g Applied to underdistributions of prior years
h Applied to 2022 distributable amount
i Carryover from 2017 not applied (see instructions)
j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from line 3f.
4Distributions for 2022 from Section D, line 7:
$
a Applied to underdistributions of prior years
b Applied to 2022 distributable amount
c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from line 4.
5 Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2022, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions.
6 Remaining underdistributions for 2022. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions.
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2023. Add lines 3j and 4c.
8 Breakdown of line 7:
a Excess from 2018.....
b Excess from 2019.....
c Excess from 2020.....
d Excess from 2021.....
e Excess from 2022.....

Schedule A (Form 990) (2022)

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 8

Part VI

Supplemental Information. Provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; Part III, line 12; Part IV, Section A, lines 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5a, 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 11a, 11b, and 11c; Part IV, Section B, lines 1 and 2; Part IV, Section C, line 1; Part IV, Section D, lines 2 and 3; Part IV, Section E, lines 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b; Part V, line 1; Part V, Section B, line 1e; Part V Section D, lines 5, 6, and 8; and Part V, Section E, lines 2, 5, and 6. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).

Facts And Circumstances Test

Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE O
(Form 990)

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 990-EZ or to provide any additional information.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
MediumBullet

Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2021

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

WMC LITIGATION CENTER INC

Employer identification number

27-3090500

Return Reference	Explanation
FORM 990-EZ, PART I, LINE 16 - OTHER EXPENSES	DESCRIPTION: INSURANCE. AMOUNT: 1,535. DESCRIPTION: LICENSES AND FEES. AMOUNT: 1,964. DESCRIPTION: OFFICE EXPENSES. AMOUNT: 2,775. DESCRIPTION: TRAVEL. AMOUNT: 63. DESCRIPTION: DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS. AMOUNT: 8,056. TOTAL TO FORM 990-EZ, LINE 16: 14,393.
FORM 990-EZ, PART II, LINE 24 - OTHER ASSETS	DESCRIPTION: PLEDGES AND GRANTS RECEIVABLE. BEG. OF YEAR AMOUNT: 15,000. END OF YEAR AMOUNT: 0. DESCRIPTION: ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE. BEG. OF YEAR AMOUNT: 0. END OF YEAR AMOUNT: 54,561. DESCRIPTION: PREPAID EXPENSES AND DEFERRED CHARGES. BEG. OF YEAR AMOUNT: 896. END OF YEAR AMOUNT: 895.
FORM 990-EZ, PART II, LINE 26 - OTHER LIABILITIES	DESCRIPTION: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES. BEG. OF YEAR AMOUNT: 5,460. END OF YEAR AMOUNT: 18,278.
FORM 990-EZ, PART III, LINE 28, PROGRAM SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONTINUED)	THE LITIGATION CENTER IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING HIGH-QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES. AS A 501(C)(3) NOT-FOR-PROFIT, PUBLIC-INTEREST LAW FIRM, THE LITIGATION CENTER DOES NOT COLLECT FEES FROM ITS CLIENTS FOR ITS SERVICES. IN CALENDAR YEAR 2022, THE LITIGATION CENTER REPRESENTED CLIENTS IN A TOTAL OF 13 LEGAL MATTERS. THE MATTERS FALL INTO SEVEN MAIN CATEGORIES: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, SEPARATION OF POWERS, ECONOMIC LIBERTY, PROPERTY RIGHTS, GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY, AND TAXATION. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. V. VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE (WAUKESHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2022CV515) THE LITIGATION CENTER IS REPRESENTING A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION IN THIS MATTER. THIS MATTER SEEKS DECLARATORY RELIEF AND AN INJUNCTION PROHIBITING FURTHER ENFORCEMENT OF THE VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE'S SO-CALLED TRANSPORTATION USER FEE. THE VILLAGE IMPOSES THIS FEE ON ALL DEVELOPED PROPERTY WITHIN THE VILLAGE, WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS. THE LITIGATION CENTER IS ARGUING THAT THIS FEE IS ILLEGAL. THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED THIS LAWSUIT IN 2022. IF SUCCESSFUL, THIS LAWSUIT WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY PREVENTING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM ILLEGALLY CREATING NEW TAXES IN CIRCUMVENTION OF LEGAL LIMITS ON TAX INCREASES. THIS LITIGATION AFFECTS VIRTUALLY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE. IT ALSO AFFECTS BROAD PUBLIC INTERESTS INVOLVING THE POWER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ADOPT NEW FEES AND TAXES. SEVERAL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN WISCONSIN HAVE ADOPTED A TRANSPORTATION FEE SIMILAR TO THE ONE BEING CHALLENGED IN THIS MATTER, AND SEVERAL OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN WISCONSIN ARE CONSIDERING ADOPTING SUCH A FEE. THIS LITIGATION SEEKS TO SET A PRECEDENT DECLARING THAT THIS TYPE OF FEE IS ILLEGAL IN ORDER TO PREVENT OTHER COMMUNITIES FROM ADOPTING OR ENFORCING A SIMILAR FEE. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR OBTAIN ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. MICHAEL BYL ET AL. V. TOWN OF LAKETOWN (POLK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 22CV274) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF FIVE FARMERS TO CHALLENGE THE LEGALITY OF A TOWN ORDINANCE THAT VIRTUALLY PROHIBITS LIVESTOCK FARMS FROM EXPANDING WITHIN THE TOWN. THIS LAWSUIT SEEKS A DECLARATION THAT THE ORDINANCE IS UNLAWFUL AND AN INJUNCTION PREVENTING FURTHER ENFORCEMENT OF IT. IF SUCCESSFUL, THIS MATTER WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY PROTECTING WISCONSIN'S AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY, PROTECTING LIVESTOCK FARMERS FROM GOVERNMENT OVERREACH, AND ENFORCING OUR STATE'S LIVESTOCK FACILITY SITING LAW (WIS. STAT. 93.90), WHICH GENERALLY BARS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM REGULATING THE PROCESS FOR SITING OR EXPANDING A LIVESTOCK FACILITY. SEVERAL OTHER TOWNS IN WISCONSIN HAVE ENACTED AN ORDINANCE VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO LAKETOWN'S, WHICH WAS BASED ON A MODEL ORDINANCE THAT THOSE TOWNS DRAFTED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LEGAL COUNSEL. IF THE LITIGATION CENTER PREVAILS IN THIS LAWSUIT, THOSE OTHER TOWNS WILL LIKELY REPEAL THEIR UNLAWFUL ANTI-FARM ORDINANCES AS WELL. THESE ORDINANCES POSE AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO WISCONSIN'S LIVESTOCK FARMS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE ADOPTED BY OTHER COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE. IF THESE ORDINANCES ARE ALLOWED TO DESTROY THE LIVESTOCK- FARM INDUSTRY IN WISCONSIN, MANY OTHER SECTORS OF WISCONSIN'S ECONOMY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY DAMAGED, INCLUDING DAIRY PROCESSORS AND CHEESEMAKERS. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS ONGOING LAWSUIT. BACKUS V. WAUKESHA COUNTY (WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, APPEAL NUMBER 2020AP307) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION IN THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT. THIS CASE INVOLVED A DISPUTE OVER THE COMPENSATION DUE TO A HOMEOWNER WHEN THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT OBTAINED A TEMPORARY LIMITED EASEMENT ON HIS PROPERTY TO DO MAINTENANCE WORK ON A NEARBY HIGHWAY. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S EFFORT IN THIS MATTER BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY HELPING TO ENSURE THAT PROPERTY OWNERS RECEIVE JUST COMPENSATION, AS REQUIRED BY THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, WHEN THE GOVERNMENT TEMPORARILY TAKES THEIR PROPERTY. IN ITS AMICUS BRIEF, THE LITIGATION CENTER ARGUED THAT "RENTAL VALUE" IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO MEASURE THE COMPENSATION DUE TO A PROPERTY OWNER FOR A TEMPORARY TAKING OF HIS OR HER PROPERTY. THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT AGREED ON THIS POINT AND THEREBY RESOLVED AN OPEN QUESTION UNDER WISCONSIN LAW. THAT HOLDING BY THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT WILL HELP ENSURE THAT PROPERTY OWNERS ARE FAIRLY AND CONSTITUTIONALLY COMPENSATED FOR A TEMPORARY LIMITED EASEMENT OR OTHER TEMPORARY TAKING OF THEIR PROPERTY. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, LLC V. CITY OF DELAVAN (WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, APPEAL NUMBER 2019AP1987) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION. THIS MATTER INVOLVED A DISPUTE OVER A CITY'S ASSESSMENT OF A BUSINESS'S PROPERTY VALUE FOR PROPERTY-TAX PURPOSES. THE BUSINESS ARGUED THAT THE CITY ASSESSOR HAD IMPROPERLY FAILED TO CONSIDER ALLEGEDLY COMPARABLE PROPERTIES JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE VACANT, THUS RESULTING IN AN EXCESSIVE ASSESSMENT. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS MATTER BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY HELPING ENSURE THAT PROPERTY OWNERS DO NOT RECEIVE EXCESSIVE TAX BILLS DUE TO AN OVER-ASSESSMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY'S VALUE. IN ITS AMICUS BRIEF, THE LITIGATION CENTER ARGUED THAT OCCUPIED PROPERTY CAN BE COMPARABLE TO VACANT PROPERTY FOR PROPERTY-TAX ASSESSMENT PURPOSES. THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT AGREED ON THAT POINT, THEREBY HELPING TO PROTECT PROPERTY OWNERS FROM EXCESSIVE TAXATION. IN WISCONSIN, PROPERTY TAXES ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY AND STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO BE BASED ON THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF A GIVEN PROPERTY. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS MATTER HELPED DEFEND THAT REQUIREMENT AND THUS HELPED PROMOTE FAIRNESS WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY TAXATION. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. BANUELOS V. UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN HOSPITALS AND CLINICS AUTHORITY (WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, APPEAL NUMBER 2020AP1582) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION, THE WISCONSIN CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL, INC. THIS MATTER INVOLVED A DISPUTE OVER THE LEGALITY OF FEES THAT A HOSPITAL CHARGED ONE OF ITS PATIENTS FOR PROVIDING ACCESS TO HER DIGITAL RECORDS. THIS CASE INVOLVED THE INTERPRETATION OF A WISCONSIN STATUTE THAT APPLIES GENERALLY TO HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS WHEN THEIR PATIENTS REQUEST ACCESS TO THEIR HEALTH CARE RECORDS. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT PROMOTED THE PUBLIC INTEREST BY ARGUING THAT HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS ARE STATUTORILY ALLOWED TO CHARGE FEES TO COVER THEIR COST OF PROVIDING DIGITAL RECORDS UPON REQUEST. AS THE LITIGATION CENTER NOTED IN ITS AMICUS BRIEF, A CONTRARY RULING WOULD INCENTIVIZE HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS TO USE PAPER RECORDS INSTEAD OF PATIENT-FRIENDLY AND ECO-FRIENDLY DIGITAL RECORDS, COULD END UP SUBJECTING PATIENTS TO LIMITLESS FEES BY ENCOURAGING HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS TO USE THIRD-PARTY RECORD SERVICES THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO STATUTORY FEE LIMITATIONS, AND COULD FORCE HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS TO PASS THE COSTS OF RECORD REQUESTS ONTO OTHER PATIENTS IN THE FORM OF HIGHER HEALTH CARE COSTS. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER.
FORM 990-EZ, PART III, LINE 28, PROGRAM SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONTINUED)	WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. ET AL. V. TONY EVERS ET AL. (WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, APPEAL NUMBERS 2020AP2081 & 2020AP2103) IN THIS MATTER IN 2022, THE LITIGATION CENTER REPRESENTED THREE BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATIONS BY PERFORMING ORAL ARGUMENT IN THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT AND FILING A MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION AFTER RECEIVING AN ADVERSE DECISION FROM THAT COURT. THIS CASE INVOLVED A DISPUTE OVER WHETHER CERTAIN RECORDS REGARDING COVID-19 WERE BARRED FROM BEING RELEASED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT UNDER WISCONSIN'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAW BECAUSE THEY WERE PRIVILEGED PATIENT HEALTH CARE RECORDS. THREE BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATIONS FILED THIS LAWSUIT TO BLOCK THE STATE GOVERNMENT FROM RELEASING THOSE RECORDS. AFTER THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT RULED THAT THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW BARRED THE THREE PLAINTIFFS FROM FILING THIS TYPE OF PRE-RELEASE LAWSUIT, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION, REQUESTING THE SUPREME COURT TO CLARIFY THAT CERTAIN LANGUAGE IN THE LOWER COURT OF APPEALS' DECISION WAS NOT BINDING PRECEDENT. SPECIFICALLY, THE MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION DISPUTED THE COURT OF APPEALS' DISCUSSION OF THE DOCTRINE OF STANDING AND ITS LANGUAGE STATING THAT WISCONSIN'S MEDICAL PRIVACY LAW DOES NOT PROTECT INFORMATION DERIVED FROM A RECORD. THIS LITIGATION AFFECTED BROAD PUBLIC INTERESTS INVOLVING THE SCOPE OF WISCONSIN STATUTES GOVERNING CONFIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE RECORDS, INFORMATION ABOUT COVID-19, AND THE ABILITY TO BRING A PRE-RELEASE LAWSUIT UNDER WISCONSIN'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAW. THIS LITIGATION SOUGHT TO OBTAIN AN INJUNCTION FROM THE TRIAL COURT AND TO CREATE PRECEDENT AT THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT. IF SUCCESSFUL, THIS LITIGATION WOULD HAVE BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY PREVENTING THE GOVERNOR'S ADMINISTRATION FROM RELEASING INFORMATION THAT WOULD HARM THE ECONOMY AND VIOLATE PRIVACY LAWS. THIS LITIGATION WOULD HAVE ALSO BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY SETTING PRECEDENT TO ENHANCE PROTECTION FOR CONFIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE RECORDS, CLARIFY WHO MAY SUE TO PROTECT THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF SUCH RECORDS, AND ENABLE MORE PERSONS TO FILE PRE-RELEASE LAWSUITS TO PROTECT THEIR PRIVACY. THIS LAWSUIT SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY PROTECTING COVID-19 PATIENTS FROM HAVING THEIR PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION RELEASED BY THEIR STATE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY SUCCESSFULLY GETTING THE SUPREME COURT TO DISAVOW THE COURT OF APPEALS' STATEMENT THAT WISCONSIN'S MEDICAL PRIVACY LAW DOES NOT PROTECT INFORMATION DERIVED FROM A RECORD. IF LEFT INTACT, THAT LANGUAGE WOULD HAVE GUTTED HEALTH CARE PATIENTS' RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THEIR MEDICAL RECORDS. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S EFFORTS IN THIS MATTER AIMED TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY RIGHTS OF HEALTH CARE PATIENTS THROUGHOUT WISCONSIN. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (OUTAGAMIE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2022CV386) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION AGAINST A STATE AGENCY TO FORCE IT TO TURN OVER UN-REDACTED COPIES OF CERTAIN RECORDS UNDER WISCONSIN'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAW. THE TRADE ORGANIZATION SOUGHT RECORDS CONCERNING THE AGENCY'S ADMINISTRATION OF A GRANT PROGRAM. THE AGENCY WITHHELD CERTAIN RECORDS AND PROVIDED REDACTED COPIES OF CERTAIN RECORDS. THIS MATTER BENEFITED THE PUBLIC BY ENFORCING WISCONSIN'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, PROMOTING GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY, AND INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE CORRUPTION. THE PLAINTIFF SOUGHT THESE GOVERNMENT RECORDS AFTER BEING ALERTED THAT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR CORRUPTION WERE POSSIBLY OCCURRING IN THE STATE AGENCY'S ADMINISTRATION OF THIS GRANT PROGRAM. THE PLAINTIFF OBTAINED THESE RECORDS SO IT COULD INVESTIGATE THIS POSSIBLE GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY CLIENT FEES IN THIS MATTER. THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT REQUESTED THE COURT TO AWARD THE PLAINTIFF COSTS, ATTORNEY FEES, AND DAMAGES UNDER ONE SECTION OF WISCONSIN'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, WIS. STAT. 19.37. PURSUANT TO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THE PLAINTIFF DID NOT OBTAIN ANY COSTS, FEES, OR DAMAGES. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ET AL. (DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 22CV1311) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER SUED A STATE AGENCY AND ITS SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION. THIS LAWSUIT ALLEGED THAT THE AGENCY'S EMERGENCY RULE ON COVID-19 AND MIGRANT WORKERS WAS UNLAWFUL BECAUSE IT DUPLICATED TWO PRIOR EMERGENCY RULES THAT HAD EXPIRED PURSUANT TO STATUTE. THIS LAWSUIT SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY PROTECTING THE SEPARATION OF POWERS BETWEEN BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENTSPECIFICALLY, BY ARGUING THAT THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE FORBADE EXECUTIVE-BRANCH AGENCIES FROM ADOPTING AN EMERGENCY RULE THAT DUPLICATES A PREVIOUS EMERGENCY RULE THAT EXPIRED PURSUANT TO A STATUTORY TIME LIMIT. IT IS AN OPEN QUESTION UNDER WISCONSIN LAW WHETHER SUCH DUPLICATIVE EMERGENCY RULES ARE PERMISSIBLE. THIS LAWSUIT SOUGHT TO RESOLVE THAT QUESTION IN THE NEGATIVE TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE TIME LIMITS THAT THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE PLACED ON EMERGENCY RULES PURSUANT TO STATE STATUTE. THIS LAWSUIT THUS SOUGHT TO ALSO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY FORCING STATE AGENCIES TO GO THROUGH THE NOTICE-AND-COMMENT PROCESS FOR FORMAL RULEMAKING AFTER AN EMERGENCY RULE EXPIRES IF AN AGENCY WISHES TO CONTINUE THE SUBSTANCE OF THAT RULE. SUCH A RESULT WOULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY REQUIRING EXECUTIVE-BRANCH OFFICIALS TO GO THROUGH THE OPEN, TRANSPARENT RULEMAKING PROCESS THAT ALLOWS FOR PARTICIPATION AND INPUT BY THE PUBLIC. THE FORMAL RULEMAKING PROCESS ALSO BENEFITS THE PUBLIC BY ALLOWING THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE LEGISLATURE TO OVERSEE THE RULEMAKING PROCESS. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, APPEAL NUMBER 22AP175) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER SERVED AS CO-COUNSEL REPRESENTING A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION IN ITS LAWSUIT AGAINST A STATE AGENCY. THE OTHER LAWYER REPRESENTING THE BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION IS A LAWYER AT ANOTHER 501(C)(3) NOT-FOR-PROFIT LEGAL ORGANIZATION. THE DISPUTE IN THIS CASE IS ABOUT WHETHER THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) HAS STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO ENTER THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE HOLDER OF A WISCONSIN POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (WPDES) PERMIT ORDER TO COLLECT WASTEWATER SAMPLES AND TEST THEM FOR SUBSTANCES THAT ARE NOT REGULATED UNDER THE LAW. THIS LAWSUIT AROSE AFTER THE DNR CONTACTED MORE THAN 100 WPDES PERMIT HOLDERS AND ORDERED THEM TO ALLOW DNR OFFICIALS ONTO THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY SO THEY COULD COLLECT AND TEST WASTEWATER SAMPLES FOR CERTAIN UNREGULATED SUBSTANCES. THIS LAWSUIT SOUGHT DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CONCERNING THE SCOPE OF THE DNR'S SAMPLING AUTHORITY. IN 2022, THE PLAINTIFF FILED A CROSS-APPEAL AFTER THE STATE AGENCY FILED ITS OWN APPEAL FROM A TRIAL COURT RULING. THE LITIGATION CENTER CO-AUTHORED TWO BRIEFS ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS. THIS LAWSUIT AND APPEAL SEEK TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO EXCLUDE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS FROM THEIR PROPERTY IF THEY DO NOT HAVE STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO ENTER THE PROPERTY. IF SUCCESSFUL, THIS APPEAL WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY ENFORCING THE STATUTORY LIMITATIONS ON THE DNR'S AUTHORITY TO ENTER PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SAMPLING FOR UNREGULATED SUBSTANCES. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER.
FORM 990-EZ, PART III, LINE 28, PROGRAM SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONTINUED)	WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. AND LEATHER RICH, INC. V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, APPEAL NUMBER 22AP718) IN THIS MATTER, A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION AND A DRY CLEANER FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE WISCONSIN STATE GOVERNMENT TO SEEK A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND AN INJUNCTION PROHIBITING A STATE AGENCY FROM ENFORCING UNPROMULGATED RULES ON SO-CALLED EMERGING CONTAMINANTS UNDER WISCONSIN'S SPILLS LAW. THE BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION IS REPRESENTED BY THE WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND LIBERTY, A 501(C)(3) NOT-FOR-PROFIT, PUBLIC-INTEREST LAW FIRM. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A NOTICE OF APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION WHEN SUMMARY-JUDGMENT BRIEFING WAS NEARLY COMPLETED. THE WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND LIBERTY IS STILL LEAD COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION, WITH THE LITIGATION CENTER AS CO-COUNSEL. THE TRIAL COURT ISSUED THE REQUESTED INJUNCTION IN 2022. THE CASE IS ON APPEAL IN THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS. THIS LITIGATION WOULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY FORCING THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW AND PROMULGATE RULES DESIGNATING CERTAIN EMERGING CONTAMINANTS AS HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES UNDER THE SPILLS LAW. THE DNR'S AD HOC ENFORCEMENT OF UNWRITTEN RULES REGARDING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES HARMS THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THE PUBLIC DOES NOT HAVE FAIR WARNING OF WHICH SUBSTANCES ARE CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS OR IN WHAT CONCENTRATIONS OR CONTEXTS. REQUIRING THE DNR TO FOLLOW THE FORMAL RULEMAKING PROCESS WOULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY ALLOWING FOR LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT, ALLOWING PUBLIC INPUT IN THE RULEMAKING PROCESS, AND PROVIDING CLEAR GUIDANCE TO THE PUBLIC AS TO WHAT THE RULES ARE. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. WISCONSIN JUSTICE INITIATIVE, INC. V. WISCONSIN ELECTIONS COMMISSION (WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, APPEAL NUMBER 2020AP2003) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION. THIS LAWSUIT INVOLVES A DISPUTE OVER THE VALIDITY OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION KNOWN AS "MARSY'S LAW," WHICH PROVIDED PROTECTIONS TO CRIME VICTIMS. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S AMICUS BRIEF URGED THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT TO UPHOLD MARSY'S LAW AFTER A TRIAL COURT HAD DECLARED IT UNLAWFULLY ADOPTED. THE AMICUS BRIEF HIGHLIGHTED THE IMPORTANT ROLE THAT THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE PLAYED IN DRAFTING THE REFERENDUM LANGUAGE THAT ULTIMATELY BECAME MARSY'S LAW IN WISCONSIN. THIS LAWSUIT BROADLY AFFECTS THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE IT CHALLENGES THE VALIDITY OF A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT PROVIDED ENHANCED PROTECTIONS FOR CRIME VICTIMS. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY URGING THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT TO UPHOLD THIS IMPORTANT PUBLIC POLICY. THE LITIGATION CENTER ALSO SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY HIGHLIGHTING THE DEFERENCE THAT COURTS OWE TO THE LEGISLATURE WHEN REVIEWING THE PROPRIETY OF REFERENDUM LANGUAGE, THEREBY HELPING TO PRESERVE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS AMONG THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. BAD RIVER BAND OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS OF THE BAD RIVER RESERVATION V. ENBRIDGE ENERGY COMPANY, INC. (U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN, CASE NUMBER 3:19CV602) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT ON BEHALF OF THREE BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATIONS FROM WISCONSIN, MICHIGAN, AND OHIO. A NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE BROUGHT THIS LAWSUIT AGAINST AN ENERGY COMPANY REGARDING A STRETCH OF PIPELINE THAT RUNS ACROSS TRIBAL LAND. THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF EMPHASIZING THE DEVASTATING ECONOMIC EFFECTS THAT WOULD RESULT IF THE COURT WERE TO ORDER THAT SEGMENT OF PIPELINE TO CLOSE IMMEDIATELY. THIS MATTER AND THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT BROADLY AFFECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST BECAUSE THE ENERGY PIPELINE IN DISPUTE IS VITALLY IMPORTANT TO THE GREAT LAKES REGION OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S AMICUS BRIEF SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC INTEREST BY HELPING TO KEEP THE PIPELINE FROM IMMEDIATELY CLOSING, WHICH CLOSURE WOULD HAVE WREAKED HAVOC ON THE GREAT LAKES REGION'S ECONOMY AND THE SUPPLY OF ENERGY IN THAT REGION. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. LORBIECKI V. PABST BREWING COMPANY (WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, APPEAL NUMBER 2022AP723) IN THIS MATTER, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ORGANIZATION IN THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS. THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED BY A WIDOW AND HER LATE HUSBAND'S ESTATE, ALLEGING AN ASBESTOS-RELATED DEATH AND SEEKING COMPENSATORY AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES. IN ITS AMICUS BRIEF, THE LITIGATION CENTER EXPLAINED HOW WISCONSIN'S STATUTORY CAP ON PUNITIVE DAMAGES WORKS. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS APPEAL SEEKS TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC BY PRESERVING THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE'S INTENT WHEN IT ENACTED A STATUTORY CAP ON PUNITIVE DAMAGES AS PART OF A LARGER TORT-REFORM BILL. IF ADOPTED BY AN APPELLATE COURT, THE PLAINTIFFS' VIEW WOULD ALLOW FOR EXORBITANT PUNITIVE DAMAGES, CONTRARY TO WHAT WISCONSIN'S LEGISLATURE INTENDED AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS. ALLOWING EXORBITANT PUNITIVE DAMAGES WOULD HARM WISCONSIN'S BUSINESS CLIMATE AND ECONOMY. THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THIS MATTER TO ADVOCATE FOR THE ONLY REASONABLE VIEW ON WISCONSIN'S STATUTORY CAP ON PUNITIVE DAMAGES. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE AIMED TO PROTECT WISCONSIN'S COMPETITIVE BUSINESS CLIMATE AND ECONOMY. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR RECEIVE ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER.

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

Cat. No. 51056K

Schedule O (Form 990) 2021

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

1	Contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts received ....................	1	140,000
2	Program service revenue including government fees and contracts ................	2
3	Membership dues and assessments .............................	3
4	Investment income ....................................	4
5a	Gross amount from sale of assets other than inventory .......	5a
b	Less: cost or other basis and sales expenses ............	5b
c	Gain or (loss) from sale of assets other than inventory (Subtract line 5b from line 5a) ......	5c
6	Gaming and fundraising events
a	Gross income from gaming (attach Schedule G if greater than $15,000)	6a
b	Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ of contributions from fundraising events reported on line 1) (attach Schedule G if the			sum of such gross income and contributions exceeds $15,000) ..	6b
c	Less: direct expenses from gaming and fundraising events ...	6c
d	Net income or (loss) from gaming and fundraising events (add lines 6a and 6b and subtract line 6c)	6d
7a	Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances ......	7a
b	Less: cost of goods sold .............	7b
c	Gross profit or (loss) from sales of inventory (Subtract line 7b from line 7a) .........	7c
8	Other revenue (describe in Schedule O) ....................	8
9	Total revenue. Add lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 5c, 6d, 7c, and 8 ..............	9	140,000

Part ⅢStatement of Program Service Accomplishments (see the instructions for Part III) Check if the organization used Schedule O to respond to any question in this Part III . .	Expenses (Required for section 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations; optional for others.)
What is the organization's primary exempt purpose? TO CREATE AN ORGANIZATION OF PERSONS INVOLVED AND/OR INTERESTED IN FURTHERING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN GREAT LAKES STATES THROUGH PROMOTING AND INSURING ADHERENCE TO DULY ENACTED LAWS AND REGULATIONS AND THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES AND RELEVANT STATES.
Describe the organization’s program service accomplishments for each of its three largest program services, as measured by expenses. In a clear and concise manner, describe the services provided, the number of persons benefited, and other relevant information for each program title.
28 THE WMC LITIGATION CENTER ("LITIGATION CENTER") IS DEDICATED TO LESSENING THE BURDENS OF GOVERNMENT THROUGH LITIGATION AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND RELATED ISSUES THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S CORE MISSION IS TO REPRESENT CLIENTS IN LEGAL ACTIONS TO FOSTER AND PROTECT THE FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM. THE LITIGATION CENTER DEFENDS THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND INDIVIDUALS FROM GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAT ACT BEYOND THEIR AUTHORITY BY COMMENCING LAWSUITS, FILING AMICUS BRIEFS, AND ASSISTING OUTSIDE COUNSEL IN SELECT CASES. (Grants $ 0) If this amount includes foreign grants, check here ...			28a	159,093
29 (Grants $ ) If this amount includes foreign grants, check here ...			29a
30 (Grants $ ) If this amount includes foreign grants, check here ...			30a
31 Other program services (describe in Schedule O) ................ (Grants $ ) If this amount includes foreign grants, check here...	31a
32 Total program service expenses (add lines 28a through 31a)..........	32	159,093

(a) Name and business address of each independent contractor	(b) Type of service	(c) Compensation
NONE

Sign Here

	Signature of officer	Date

	Type or print name and title

Name of organization WMC LITIGATION CENTER INC

Part I Contributors	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	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
Schedule B (Form 990) (2022)

10	Grants and similar amounts paid (list in Schedule O) ................	10
11	Benefits paid to or for members ......................	11
12	Salaries, other compensation, and employee benefits ................	12	163,742
13	Professional fees and other payments to independent contractors ............	13	14,391
14	Occupancy, rent, utilities, and maintenance ...................	14	13,437
15	Printing, publications, postage, and shipping ...................	15	327
16	Other expenses (describe in Schedule O) ...................	16	14,393
17	Total expenses. Add lines 10 through 16 .................	17	206,290

18	Excess or (deficit) for the year (Subtract line 17 from line 9) ............	18	-66,290
19	Net assets or fund balances at beginning of year (from line 27, column (A)) (must agree with
	end-of-year figure reported on prior year’s return) .................	19	170,964
20	Other changes in net assets or fund balances (explain in Schedule O) ...........	20	0
21	Net assets or fund balances at end of year. Combine lines 18 through 20 ..........	21	104,674

Name of organization WMC LITIGATION CENTER INC		Employer identification number 27-3090500

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) (2022)


Name of organization WMC LITIGATION CENTER INC			Employer identification number 27-3090500
Part III Exclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions to organizations described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) that total more than $1,000 for the year from any one contributor. 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.) $ Use duplicate copies of Part III if additional space is needed.