District Court Jurisdiction
The Law
The district courts of this state shall have jurisdiction, upon the application of any person to enforce the purpose of the Open Meetings Act, by injunction, mandamus or other appropriate order. The court shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person who is successful in bringing a court action to enforce the provisions of the Open Meetings Act. If the prevailing party in a legal action brought under this section is a public body defendant, it shall be awarded court costs. A public body defendant that prevails in a court action brought under this section shall be awarded its reasonable attorney fees from the plaintiff if the plaintiff brought the action without sufficient information and belief that good grounds supported it.
Commentary
This Subsection confers jurisdiction on the district courts to hear questions concerning purported violations of the Act. Should a district court determine that a public body’s actions were illegally taken, it may declare them invalid, thereby overcoming the presumption of validity conferred under Section 10-15-3(A) of the Act. The court may issue an order enjoining the public body from implementing its illegal action, an order requiring the public body to take action required by the Act or any other appropriate order.
Example 92:
A city council voted in closed session to sell the furnishings of a city-owned building. Twenty (20) days after the city council receives a citizen’s written notice of violation and takes no action to address it, the citizen applies to district court to enjoin the sale because the decision to sell was improperly made in a closed meeting. Only the sale of real property may be considered in closed session. The court enjoins the sale and the decision of the city council is nullified. The council must reconsider the sale at an open meeting.
Commentary
This Subsection also provides that a district court shall award individuals who prevail in a court proceeding to enforce the Act their court costs and reasonable attorney fees.
Example 93:
Ms. Garcia learns from the president of a local construction company that the town council has awarded the company a contract to build a public swimming pool. Ms. Garcia writes to the mayor alleging that the town council violated the Act because it awarded the contract outside of a public meeting. The mayor reads Ms. Garcia’s letter and forwards it to the other councilors. The council does not take any steps to address Ms. Garcia’s letter. Fifteen days after the mayor received her letter, Ms. Garcia may file a lawsuit against the council to enforce the Act. If she succeeds in proving that a violation occurred, she will be entitled to an award of costs and reasonable attorney fees.
Commentary
If a public body successfully defends itself against a lawsuit brought to enforce an alleged violation of the Act, the public body defendant is entitled to court costs. A prevailing public body defendant is entitled to attorney fees only if the court determines that the person who brought The Lawsuit did so without any valid basis or support.
Example 94:
Assume the same facts set forth in Example 91. At the hearing on the application for injunctive relief, the school board defends itself by alleging that the parents’ claims were not supported by any facts showing a violation of the Open Meetings Act. If the parents brought the lawsuit under the Act without any belief that good grounds supported it, the court may find that the lawsuit was frivolous and, in addition to denying the injunction, award the school board its court costs and reasonable attorney fees.