![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
-87- 5. [[underlined]] Hart v. National Collection of Fine Arts of the Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] As previously reported, this case concerns the validity of a testamentary document which names the Smithsonian as a beneficiary. Just prior to her death, Alma Thomas, a Washington artist, executed a handwritten statement leaving a portion of her works to the National Collection of Fine Arts. Harold Hart, the named executor in an earlier will of Miss Thomas, challenged the validity of the handwritten statement. The assistance of the Justice Department, both the NCFA and Harold Hart have agreed upon a "Stipulation for Settlement" which will be presented to the D. C. Probate Court for approval. Under the settlement, the NCFA will receive a representative selection of Miss Thomas' works as well as access to all records pertaining to the artist's career. 6. There have been no recent developments in the following cases, which had been reported previously to the Board: [[underlined]] Bowler v. Ripley [[/underlined]] (racial discrimination) [[underlined]] Chedister v. United States [[/underlined]] (termination of employment) [[underlined]] Dance V. Ripley [[/underlined]] (racial discrimination) [[underlined]] Lucas v. Ripley [[/underlined]] (class action – sex and racial discrimination) [[underlined]] Santoro v. United States [[/underlined]] (tort claim) [[underlined]] United States v. Tougas [[/underlined]] (to recover proceeds of sales of federal excess property) [[underlined]] CASES DISPOSED OF [[/underlined]]: 1. [[underlined]] Lacey Act Violations at the National Zoological Park [[/underlined]] Notices of Violation were issued to two National Zoological Park civil service employees in connection with purchases of animals protected by endangered species laws (the Lacey Act, 18 U.S. C. 43). The Notices were issued by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, and proposed the assessment of civil penalties of $2,600 against each of the two employees for alleged lack of due care in purchasing the animals. Since the employees made the purchases for the National Zoo in the course and scope of their employment, the Smithsonian retained private counsel to defend the employees in the administrative proceedings within the Interior Department and in any subsequent appeals. A negotiated settlement took place between