Earlier this month, the Supreme Court considered whether James Freed, a city manager who maintained a “mixed use” Facebook account on which he posted information…

Continue Reading Supreme Court Announces New Test for Determining Whether Social Media Posts Constitute State Action

The Nutmeg Board of Education is in the thick of its budget deliberations, and the members are having trouble establishing priorities. Board members Red Cent…
Continue Reading SEE YOU IN COURT! – February 2019

Mr. Chairperson has had his hands full with two new members of the Nutmeg Board of Education. Mal Content and Chrissie Critical were elected to the Board just last November, but they quickly started antagonizing Mr. Chairperson and the other Board members. Nothing, it seemed, was right in their view. Mal and Chrissie complained at the Board meetings about the “do-nothing” Board, and they repeatedly complained by email to all the other Board members. Some Board members tried to respond to their concerns by return email, but the disaffected two were unmoved and continued to find fault with the Board.

Mal and Chrissie were frustrated, they claimed, because Mr. Chairperson was thwarting their reform efforts. They had both repeatedly asked that an item be added to the Board meeting agenda – appointment of a special counsel to investigate Board member collusion with Seymour Dollars, venerable Chair of the Nutmeg Board of Finance. They claimed that Seymour was pulling the strings on Board decision-making, and they wanted the other Board members to be questioned under oath as to what Seymour Dollars has said to them and when he said it. They even suggested that Mr. Chairperson take an straw poll of the Board members by email, claiming that he would find that a majority of the Board members agree with their request. However, Mr. Chairperson stonewalled them, telling them that such a witch hunt would not be allowed on his watch.

Finally, the other Board members had had it with the disaffected two, and speaking for the others, veteran Board member Bob Bombast proposed at a special meeting to add an item to the agenda – “Executive session for the purpose of evaluation of the performance of two difficult Board members.” Before the motion could even be seconded, however, Mal spoke up, stating the any discussion as to his efforts to straighten out the “dysfunctional” Board of Education should be held in open session. Chrissie weighed in as well, claiming that she would not be a party to any attempt secretly to defame her and interfere with her efforts to clean house.

“Never mind,” Bob responded. “If we can’t have a candid discussion about these two trouble-makers in executive session, we’ll just have a more general discussion in executive session about Board operation.” With that, the Board voted to convene into executive session. Not surprisingly, however, the discussion of “Board operation” soon devolved to an angry exchange between the other Board members and Mal and Chrissie about how they as Board members were misbehaving.

Mal and Chrissie were unchastened, and they decided to pursue their crusade through FOI requests. They asked for any and all email communications between and among any member of the Board and/or with Seymour Dollars concerning budget matters. Pushing hard, they demanded that all such emails be produced within four business days, “in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act,” they said.

Mr. Superintendent responded within four business days, informing Mal and Chrissie that the district is working on their request, but it will take some weeks to find, review and produce all of the emails.

Can Mal and Chrissie file an FOIA complaint, and will they win?
Continue Reading SEE YOU IN COURT! – October 2018

Originally appeared in the CAS Weekly Newsletter.
Written by attorney Thomas B. Mooney.

Dear Legal Mailbag:

For the last five years as the principal of an elementary school, I have done my very best to stay under the radar of the board of education. I appreciate the public service of the board members and all, but they are really a bunch of nosy parkers who should get a life.

Why am I telling you this, you ask. Here is the situation…The first day of school a parent came to see me with a concern that his daughter was being bullied. I was, of course, appropriately sympathetic, and I tried to ask the father what we could do to help. But he kept getting louder and angrier, and then he started making vulgar verbal attacks on my staff and on me personally. He was impervious to my efforts to de-escalate, and finally I had to tell him that our meeting was over. Even then, he kept on shouting until I threatened to call the police. He finally agreed to leave, but not before he warned me that I would be hearing more from him.

Hear, I did. The father continued the attacks, except this time on social media. To read his posts, I am a heartless bureaucrat who chased him out of my office and hates students. Unfortunately, some of the Board members took notice of these attacks, and now I find myself the subject of an executive session discussion. On the whole, I’d rather be in Philadelphia, but I am thinking that it would probably be best for me to attend the executive session. Can I do that?

Thank you,
I Am Innocent
Continue Reading CAS Legal Mailbag Question of the Week – 9/18/2018