Kramon & Graham represents a variety of nonprofit entities concerning all facets of those organizations' activities. Our clients include independent schools, health care institutions, museums, religious institutions of different faiths, and philanthropic and charitable organizations. We have assisted nonprofit clients with issues involving business structuring, employment, real estate, board of directors, and any related litigation.

We are particularly proud to have represented two of Baltimore's premier museums in separate, high-profile litigations, and several of the area's most well-respected independent schools in matters involving sensitive student disciplinary issues.

Our attorneys serve as board members, volunteers, and fundraisers for many nonprofit entities. Kramon & Graham's attorneys have a long and proud tradition of serving as leaders and supporters of Baltimore's cultural and charitable communities. We are proud of our positions of leadership in a broad range of organizations, and our substantial commitment of time and support is remarkable in view of the firm's modest number of lawyers. As a result of that experience and commitment, we have first-hand knowledge of how nonprofit entities operate, and the unique legal challenges they face.

Representative Matters

Jury Verdict in Favor of Independent School
Geoffrey Genth and Ezra Gollogly successfully defended an independent school, school administrators, and school trustees in a jury trial in May and June, 2011. A student, whom the school had required to withdraw for engaging in misconduct with regard to the school’s computer system, including downloading the school’s confidential data onto his personal thumb-drive, instituted the case. Additional plaintiffs were the student’s parents, one of whom was a former teacher at the school who brought employment-related claims. Plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. After a two-week trial, the jury rendered a defense verdict on 11 of the 12 counts. Finding that Plaintiffs were entitled under one count to the value of the thumb-drive that the student had surrendered to the school, the jury awarded Plaintiffs $22.50. After the Circuit Court denied the Plaintiffs’ post-trial motion, the Plaintiffs elected not to appeal, and the judgment became final in September, 2011.