Skip to main content
Cited Statutes Annotation
Beckham v. City of Bowling Green 61.810 Although a quorum of the commissioners may have discussed the issue among themselves at a gathering other than a regular meeting, the trial court specifically found that no secret meetings were held in violation of the Open Meetings Act, where the entire matter concerning the salaries was publicly aired in the press and broadcast media, and there was testimony at trial that the police officers, themselves and through counsel, engaged in discussions with the commissioners regarding the reduction of their salaries. Beckham v. Bowling Green, 743 S.W.2d 858, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 603 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987). Link
Carter v. Smith 61.810, 61.800 County Board of Education violated Kentucky’s Open Meetings Act,  KRS 61.800- 61.850, by discussing in a closed session the resignation of the superintendent of schools and his appointment as a consultant to the school district. Neither the litigation exception in  KRS 61.810(l)(c) nor the personnel exception in  KRS 61.810(l)(f) applied; there was only a remote possibility of litigation, and the enumerated personnel topics did not include either an employee’s resignation or a contractor’s hiring.  Carter v. Smith, 366 S.W.3d 414, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 66 (Ky. 2012). Link
Courier-Journal v. University of Louisville 61.810 Where a university board of trustees, during its July 18, 1977, meeting, closed said meeting to consider the election of one (1) of two (2) individual members to the position of chairman of the board of trustees, the meeting was a properly closed session. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co. v. University of Louisville Bd. of Trustees, 596 S.W.2d 374, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 524 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979). Link
Floyd County Board of Education v. Ratliff 61.805, 61.810 Injunction was proper under KRS 61.848 — even without a showing that petitioners had no adequate remedy at law — when a school board violated the Open Meeting Law by discussing a personnel reorganization plan in closed “executive” meetings; the preparation-for-litigation exception would not apply to mere discussion of whether dismissed administrators might sue the board. Also, the board failed to adhere to KRS 61.815, which requires that, before going into a closed session, a public body must state the exact exception it relies on to go into a closed meeting. Floyd County Bd. of Educ. v. Ratliff, 955 S.W.2d 921, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 145 (Ky. 1997). Link
Lexington Herald-Leader Co. v. University of Kentucky Presidential Search Committee 61.810 The Presidential Search Committee created by the Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky was not excepted from declaring public meetings when discussing the appointment of a president. Lexington Herald-Leader Co. v. University of Kentucky Presidential Search Committee, 732 S.W.2d 884, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 227 (Ky. 1987). Link
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.