O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 20-2-757 (2019)

Applicability of public inspection and open meeting laws

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) All proceedings and hearings conducted under this subpart shall be confidential and shall not be subject to the open meetings requirement of Code Section 50-14-1 or other open meetings laws. (b) All electronic or other written records of all hearings conducted under this subpart; all statements of charges; all notices of hearings; and all written decisions rendered by a hearing officer, tribunal, the local board of education, or the State Board of Education shall not be subject to public inspection or other disclosure under Article 4 of Chapter 18 of Title 50 or other public disclosure laws; provided, however, the board of education shall prepare a written summary of any proceeding conducted under this subpart, which summary shall include a description of the incident and the disposition thereof but shall not contain the names of any party to the incident. The summary shall be a public record.

History

Code 1981, § 20-2-757, enacted by Ga. L. 1984, p. 908, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 149,

§ 20; Ga. L. 1986, p. 10, § 20; Ga. L. 1989, p. 836, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1987–2008 · leading case: Napper v. Georgia Television Co., 356 S.E.2d 640 (Ga. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Napper v. Georgia Television Co., 356 S.E.2d 640 (Ga. 1987). · cites it 2× “” In addition, a written summary of a public-school disciplinary proceeding, which includes a description of the incident and the disposition thereof but not the names of any party to the incident, is a public record under OCGA § 20-2-757 (c). After reviewing the file concerning…”

Atkins v. News Publ'g Co., 658 S.E.2d 848 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Atkins did not explain in layman’s terms that the hearing was confidential and that the law prohibited him from revealing whether it even occurred, but summarily noted that the records were “not subject to inspection” pursuant to “OCGA§ 20-2-757 (b).” Because a trier of fact…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.