Baltrip v. Norris’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The Supreme Court further defined this `narrow exception' in Van Hooser v. Warren County Bd. of Educ. , 807 S.W.2d 230 (Tenn. 1991). In that case, the school board retired during a meeting to discuss with its attorney the status of a teacher who was accused of paddling students. Id. at 233 . The teacher argued that the Act was violated because no charges had been filed against her nor was any litigation pending when the meeting occurred . Id. at 237 . The Court disagreed , finding that the Act is not violated by a closed meeting when there is `a pending controversy that [is] likely to result in litigation between the school district and [the teacher].' Id . However , the Court found that in this closed meeting the board members had discussed and assented to the proposed conditions by which the teacher would return to work. Id . Because the board had `made decisions or deliberated toward a decision' during the closed meeting, the Court found that the board had violated the Act . Id . " We hold that the Board did not violate the Act in this case when it met with its attorney. When the Board met with its counsel, there was a `pending controversy that was likely to result in litigation ,' i.e. , a charge of unprofessional conduct had been lodged, and was then pending, against Baltrip. The depositions of the Board members show that during the meeting with [the attorney for the Board ], she advised them of three options in regard to Baltrip: (1) termination; (2) reinstatement; or ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 867 So. 2d 293 - Auburn University v. ADVERTISER COMPANY

2. ““Unprofessional conduct” has been defined as “conduct that violates the rules or the ethical code of a profession or that is unbecoming a member of a profession in good standing, or which indicates a teacher’s unfitness to teach.” Morris v. Clarksville-Montgomery County Consol. Bd. of Educ., 867 S.W.2d 324, 329 (Tenn.Ct.App.1993) (citing 68 Am.Jur.2d Schools § 161 (1993)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Winkler v. Tipton County Board of Education

3. “'In summary, we hold that discussions between a public body and its attorney concerning pending litigation are not subject to the Open Meetings Act. We emphasize that this is a narrow exception and applies only to those situations in which the public body is a named party in the lawsuit .'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 867 So. 2d 293 - Auburn University v. ADVERTISER COMPANY