attorney-consultation exception (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

attorney-consultation exception in Texas

6 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2011–2012 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Olympic Waste Services v. City of Grand Salinegreen
texapp · 2006 · cited in 6 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2012
2 sentences

2012See Killam Ranch Props., Ltd. v. Webb County, ___ S.W.3d ___, ___, 2012 WL 1193722 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2012, no pet. h.); Olympic Waste, 204 S.W.3d at 502 ; see also Tex. Att'y Gen.

2012See Olympic Waste, 204 S.W.3d at 504 (holding that while discussion of merits of proposed contract in executive session with legal counsel violated TOMA, open-session vote to award contract did not violate TOMA and contract was not voidable); Weatherford, 157 S.W.3d at 486 (holding even if council members expressed opinions in closed session and closed session with counsel violated Act's exception and notice provisions, final vote occurred in open session and no voidable final action was taken); United Indep.

66
Killam Ranch Properties, Ltd. v. Webb County, Texasgreen
texapp · 2012 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See Killam Ranch Props., Ltd. v. Webb County, ___ S.W.3d ___, ___, 2012 WL 1193722 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2012, no pet. h.); Olympic Waste, 204 S.W.3d at 502 ; see also Tex. Att'y Gen.

2012See Killam Ranch Props., Ltd. v. Webb County, - S.W.3d -, -, 2012 WL 1193722 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2012, no pet. h.); Olympic Waste, 204 S.W.3d at 502 ; see also Tex. Att’y Gen.

44
Weatherford v. City of San Marcosgreen
texapp · 2005 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See Olympic Waste, 204 S.W.3d at 504 (holding that while discussion of merits of proposed contract in executive session with legal counsel violated TOMA, open-session vote to award contract did not violate TOMA and contract was not voidable); Weatherford, 157 S.W.3d at 486 (holding even if council members expressed opinions in closed session and closed session with counsel violated Act's exception and notice provisions, final vote occurred in open session and no voidable final action was taken); United Indep.

2012See Weatherford v. City of San Marcos, 157 S.W.3d 473, 485-86 (Tex. App.—Austin 6 A governmental body is not required to keep a certified agenda or make a tape recording of the proceedings of a closed meeting permitted under the attorney-consultation exception provided by section 551.071.

44

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TX § Tex. Occ. Code § 901.002 (4) TX § Tex. Occ. Code § 901.005 (4) TX § Tex. Occ. Code § 901.501 (4) TX § Tex. Occ. Code § 901.508 (4) TX § Tex. Occ. Code § 901.556 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check