Annotations for Decision

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). Full Details

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 this section, 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). Full Details

Injunction was proper under this section — 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). Full Details