City of San Antonio v. Fourth Court of Appeals
Texas Supreme Court
1DissentMauzy, Justice
Because the court allows the Relator, City of San Antonio, to circumvent the statutory requirements of the Open Meetings Act, I dissent. In holding that the notice was sufficient to detail the purpose of the city council’s action, the court reasons that “[t]he intended beneficiaries of the Act are not individual citizens, such as the particular landowners affected by the condemnation, but members of the interested public." Maj.Op. at 765 (emphasis added). Who would be more interested than the landowners whose property is the subject of a condemnation discussion? The “interested public”…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Acker v. Texas Water CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 1990
- Robinson v. Central Texas MHMR CenterTexas Supreme Court · 1989
- Marmon v. Mustang Aviation, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1968
- Cox Enterprises v. Bd. of Tr. of Austin ISDTexas Supreme Court · 1986
- Love v. WilcoxTexas Supreme Court · 1930
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.