Judy Kay-Wolff


It has been a while since I reported on the disbursal of Peter Pender’s total bequest of $77,500 to the ACBL or its tax alter ego The Educational Foundation (EF), the latter of which has been very cooperative through the efforts of Dr. Eugene Kales.

I have several hundred pages of correspondence on the two separate individual bequests.  The first donation, as you recall, was to The Junior Trials (JT) trophies. an event held every two years.   We discovered, though it was designed before Peter’s death on 11/19/90, $27,500 was turned over for the making of engraved replicas and presentation to the players of the proud winning team (usually 6) plus the captain and sometimes even a coach.  We discovered it was done for the first two occasions and then discontinued dead in its tracks.   I spoke to my honorable friend, Jay Baum, who conceded I was indeed right and I am happy to report that they have taken care of everything until 2006 – leaving two Junior years to be brought up to date.   Jay has never disappointed a reasonable request and it looks like the JT debacle will soon be behind us.

However, the $50,000 bequest by Peter to the ACBL/EF is still up in the air with many issues unresolved and buried under the carpet as it started over twenty years ago.  Despite my request to put it on the NO Agenda, it was not.   It seems when respectable people have an issue involving so much money, it is worthy of consideration to further bridge which has gone awry.  But alas, No!  The status:  $10,700 remains in the fund though the Pendergraph has disappeared into outer space. No one even remembers for certain the last time the Pendergraph name was used.   For those of you who want the details, see my several earlier blogs on the subject.   The long and the short of it was the vu-graph (recognized and acknowledged in many correspondences of the BOD and EF) was to be renamed Pendergraph.

Substantial sums were used for screens,  monitors, computers, etc. plus payment for the development of sophisticated improvement (which was accomplished by the geniuses at BBO, namely Fred Gitelman and staff).   Wonderful – no qualms at all.    However, the Pendergraph name was dropped in ???? and we maintain that is when the money flow from Peter’s endowment should have stopped on the dime although EF records show the continuing disbursements long after Peter’s name stopped being used (The Pendergraph).

Let’s face it – in the vernacular – Peter got screwed.   Bobby had been in on the original  group with Becky Rogers who convinced a very ill Pender (dying from AIDS) that he should have his name perpetuated and the vugraph (Pendergraph) was the way to go.   So much for that.   Peter very much wanted to be remembered and have his name perpetuated for years to come to be recalled by his peers and those that followed.

My suggestion is that all money used after the stoppage of the name Pendergraph should be added back to the $10,700 remaining and (1) PREFERABLY USED FOR SOME WORTHY CAUSE – PERHAPS TO PAY THE WAY FOR EXTRA EXPENSES OF THOSE NON-PROFESSIONALS WHO WIN THE RIGHT TO  REPRESENT THE COUNTRY AND NEED SUBSIDIZING CALLING IT THE PETER PENDER INTERNATIONAL FUND: OR (2) Return the full irresponsibly used money (about $25,000) to Peter’s residual estate heirs .. as his wishes were not honored – more specially violated.

By the way, the suggestion of calling it THE PENDERGRAPH THEATRE PRESENTS BBO was turned down as it was decided it was not equitable.

Bobby’s views are even stronger, but no shy bunny (or wolff) is he so he can howl for himself.


JoanOctober 15th, 2010 at 8:30 pm


I must be missing something! Regardless of how the money was turned over (either outright or directly via Mr. Pender’s will) to the ACBL (or Educational Foundation), SOMEONE MUST BE ACCOUNTABLE AND RESPONSIBLE for minding the store.

I understand the replicas every two years for Junior Team Trophy ($27,500) are almost resolved — but how can everyone look the other way about the dropping of the vugraph (originally named Pendergraph after the fifty thousand buck donation) and still in all good conscience believe Peter’s wish to both commemorate and perpetuate the name of PETER PENDER not constitute a betrayal to a generous gentleman?

How do they explain their nonchalance and indifference to the misuse of Peter’s money?

I admire you for your pursuit of this matter.

AdamOctober 15th, 2010 at 8:48 pm

Hi Judy:

I have been following this horrific story from your first introduction on this site. How is it possible once the ACBL and EF were both informed of your concerns that the Board of Directors or CEO or league legal counsel have not tried to resolve it?

This Inquiring Mind wants to know.


Judy Kay-WolffOctober 15th, 2010 at 9:02 pm


Your guess is as good as mine. I have spoken to one of Peter’s lawyers but he did not handle the will although he did mention The Pendergraph. Another close to the scene has a hazy recollection also. Amazing how bridge players can have such short memories.

One thing is for damn sure — and that is he did not kick over $77,500 out of the pure goodness of his heart. People want something for their money. In Peter’s case, it was remembrance.

However, I intend to speak by phone to a good friend and frequent partner of Peter’s who is in a legal position to know the best way to proceed — and you can bet your bottom dollar — this is not the end of this travesty.

As I said before, it is like picking a dead man’s pocket as the ACBL has at this time failed (having stopped) using the Pendergraph (for many years now as it has been replaced by the wonderful BBO). However, Peter paid big bucks for specific name identification to (perpetuate his name so he will not be forgotten).

The slipshod handling of the $27,500 on the Junior Issue is almost resolved — but the Pendergaffe is still left hanging in mid-air. Hopefully I can get some answers tomorrow.

It is nice to have concerned readers. Thanks. Adam.