MANHATTAN (CN) — Real estate moguls Jody and Douglas Durst, along with the Durst Organization, sued the political advocacy group No Labels in New York state court Tuesday, claiming the nonprofit has "fundamentally betrayed its donors’ trust" over the possibility it will run an independent "unity ticket" in the 2024 presidential election.
The family says it began donating to No Labels in 2016 with a $10,000 check from Douglas Durst, younger brother of deceased convicted murderer Robert Durst, with hopes that the nominally centrist organization would "promote bipartisan compromise to achieve consensus." No Labels touts a similar mission online, appealing to those who feel "politically homeless" or are "tired of the extremes on the left and the right."
But the prospect of No Labels running an independent presidential ticket, the Dursts claim, is antithetical to that mission. They argue that a third-party centrist candidate will only give former President Donald Trump, the favored Republican candidate, an electoral edge. With that that in mind, the family worth $8.1 billion now wants its $145,000 in donations to No Labels refunded, raising multiple breach of contract, unfair dealing and unjust enrichment claims.
"The promise of promoting bipartisan government that No Labels made to donors such as the Dursts has now been irretrievably broken, and the Dursts, for one, want their money back," the Dursts say in the complaint. "They want no part of an organization that seems bent on pursuing a doomed third-party presidential bid outside the nation’s de facto two-party system."
No Labels itself states online that it has not committed to running a 2024 presidential ticket, and has not publicly announced any candidates.
"No Labels has not decided whether we will ultimately offer our ballot line to an independent Unity ticket, much less who would be on it," the group's "Unity Ticket 2024 FAQ" says.
The group nevertheless announced this month that it is on the ballot in 13 states, and is working toward ballot access in an additional 14.
A spokesperson from No Labels sent Courthouse News an additional statement from attorney Dan Webb of the Chicago-based law firm Winston & Strawn, who they said is serving as a "volunteer attorney" for the group. In it, Webb denounced the suit as "frivolous," noting Jody Durst wrote his last $10,000 check to the organization in 2020, while Douglas last donated $125,000 to No Labels in 2017.
"This is nothing more than an organized distraction. Douglas’ last contribution was six years ago, and Jody’s last contribution was over three years ago. These contributions were spent on priorities that the Dursts had no complaints about at the time," Webb wrote.
The Dursts' attorney Randy Mastro of the New York law firm King & Spaulding issued his own prepared statement on the case, claiming the Dursts "believe they were sold a bill of goods, and they want no part of it."
"The Dursts agreed to fund No Labels because it committed to promote bipartisanship and bridge the political divide," Mastro said. "They never imagined at the time that No Labels would pivot to becoming the organization behind a quixotic third-party candidacy that could skew the most consequential presidential election of our lifetime."
No Labels was co-founded in 2010 by former Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson, with involvement from other political operators such as former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum and media producer Mark McKinnon. It reportedly faced early suspicions that it was a vehicle for a 2012 presidential run by then-New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who spoke at its first conference that December. Since then it has fostered what it calls a "problem-solvers caucus" of moderate House Republicans and conservative House Democrats. It maintains a similar list of senators, including Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia and ex-Democrat-turned-independent Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
The Dursts' lawsuit is not the first scandal the organization has faced. A report in Politico from late 2022 featured staffers who accused it of fostering a "cutthroat" and "toxic" culture, and this month the group reached out to the Justice Department, asking it to investigate a "highly coordinated, conspiratorial, partisan, and often unlawful conspiracy."
That conspiracy, the group claimed, was carried out by other political organizations such as Third Way, The Lincoln Project and End Citizens United, with the goal of blocking No Labels' ballot access and taking "any steps necessary to prevent the formation and success of a No Labels Unity presidential ticket."
Webb's statement to Courthouse News echoed this claim, arguing that the Dursts' suit was part of "a conspiracy to subvert No Labels’ ballot access work."
But to the Dursts, No Labels is itself the dishonest actor, accusing it of pulling a "bait and switch" when it prepared to potentially run a third party ticket.
"Had No Labels ever given any indication that it might pursue such a gambit, the Dursts never would have funded the organization," the Dursts say in their complaint.
Follow @djbyrnes1
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
