This case is cited to support the argument that the burden of proving that a meeting time is inconvenient lies with the complainant. It is used to argue that merely suggesting a meeting time is inconvenient without substantial proof does not constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
93-OMD-020 was Cited by 08-OMD-012
Our AG treatments are described and categorized by large language models (AI) and are partially reviewed by Coalition directors. Learn more from our blog.
Disclaimer:
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.
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.