Special circumstance.

- That no official action is taken at a closed meeting is not necessarily a "special circumstance" for purposes of reducing or eliminating liability for a fee award under O.C.G.A. § 50-14-5(b) of the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq., because the need for open government is not limited to meetings in which formal measures are taken. Evans County Bd. of Comm'rs v. Claxton Enter., 255 Ga. App. 656, 566 S.E.2d 399 (2002).

One-year limitation period only applied to suits to invalidate acts.

- Trial court erred in dismissing an action by the taxpayers alleging violations of the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1, et seq., by a local airport authority in planning and submitting an FAA application because the limitation period in O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(b)(2) pertained only to suits to invalidate public agency actions, and the taxpayers sought only declaratory relief, injunctive relief, attorney fees, and civil penalties. Avery v. Paulding County Airport Auth., 343 Ga. App. 832, 808 S.E.2d 15 (2017).

Attorney's fees.

- If the trial court determines that noncompliance with the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. Ch. 14, T. 50, lacked substantial justification, the court must award attorney fees; then the court may reduce or eliminate the award completely upon a finding of special circumstances. Claxton Enter. v. Evans County Bd. of Comm'rs, 249 Ga. App. 870, 549 S.E.2d 830 (2001).

Acting without substantial justification and acting in bad faith are not synonymous for purposes of an attorney fee award under O.C.G.A. § 50-14-5(b) of the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1 et seq. Evans County Bd. of Comm'rs v. Claxton Enter., 255 Ga. App. 656, 566 S.E.2d 399 (2002).

City councilmembers' claims against a mayor under the Open Meetings Act for a civil penalty, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-6, were subject to dismissal because the complaint only named the mayor in the mayor's official capacity, and § 50-14-6 applied to "persons"; the claim for attorney's fees, O.C.G.A. § 15-14-5(b), was in essence against the city and was not subject to dismissal. Lue v. Eady, 297 Ga. 321, 773 S.E.2d 679 (2015).

Complaint stated claims for declaratory and injunctive relief under the act.

- Court of appeals erred in affirming the dismissal of a citizen's action alleging that a city and city counsel members violated the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(e)(2), because the complaint stated claims for declaratory and injunctive relief under the Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-5(a), based upon alleged violations of O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(e)(2) since the minutes of a counsel meeting omitted the names of council members who voted in the minority to amend certain council rules; the court of appeals erred in interpreting O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(e)(2) to allow minutes of an agency meeting to omit the names of persons voting against a proposal or abstaining when the vote was not taken by roll-call and was not unanimous. Cardinale v. City of Atlanta, 290 Ga. 521, 722 S.E.2d 732 (2012).

When no public vote was held for appointment of interim city manager, consideration of relief was appropriate.

- In a firefighter's suit against a city and officials alleging violation of the Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1, et seq., summary judgment under O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(b) was proper as to three officials appointed more than 90 days before the firefighter's suit was filed; as to a fourth official, as to whom suit was timely, because the city failed to hold any public vote on the official's interim position, summary judgment was improper, and remand was required for a determination of relief under O.C.G.A. §§ 50-14-5 and50-14-6. Martin v. City of College Park, 342 Ga. App. 289, 802 S.E.2d 292 (2017).

Cited in Schoen v. Cherokee County, 242 Ga. App. 501, 530 S.E.2d 226 (2000); Moon v. Terrell County, 260 Ga. App. 433, 579 S.E.2d 845 (2003); Heiskell v. Roberts, 342 Ga. App. 109, 802 S.E.2d 385 (2017).