Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Ex Rel. Schuler v. Dunbar

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1981No. 42976Published

1DissentKrivosha, C.J.

If, in fact, the majority opinion holds, as I believe it does, that the provisions of the open meetings law (Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 84-1408 to 84-1414 (Reissue 1976)) preclude a public body from correcting its own records, nunc pro tunc, to reflect what in fact took place, I must respectfully dissent. I believe that the majority in this case has both misconstrued the open meetings law and the evidence in this record.

It is clear beyond dispute that at common law a municipal council may at any time correct its minutes *78to reflect the truth. The general rule as stated in 56 Am. Jur. 2d Municipal…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Egbert v. WenzlNebraska Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Paulsen v. CourtneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Southern Railway Co. v. Cherokee CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  4. Norfolk Southern Railroad v. ForbesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  5. Payne v. RyanNebraska Supreme Court · 1907

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API