Advertisement

May 25, 2013

“Executive Session Privilege”: There is No Such Thing

Several new board of education members will begin their duties on July 1, 2012. Many of these duties are outlined in West Virginia Code § 18-5-13. These new board members will undergo new board member orientation and might feel overwhelmed with the "formal" process of board meetings and the West Virginia Open Governmental Proceedings Act, personnel issues, RIF and transfer season, superintendent evaluations, student expulsion hearings, etc. The purpose of this month's newsletter is to remind you and your board members (both new and old) that many issues, including personnel issues, discussed in executive session are communications which may be subject to discovery in a deposition or other legal proceeding by an impacted employee. In other words, the board cannot assume that what is discussed in executive session is privileged information which will remain behind closed doors.

As we all know, West Virginia Code § 6-9A-4 provides that an executive session can be had to consider matters arising from the appointment, employment, retirement, promotion, transfer, demotion, disciplining, resignation, discharge, dismissal or compensation of a public officer or employee. Therefore, these particular “personnel” matters can be discussed in executive session. However, a long-standing West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case, Staton v. Hrko (W.Va. 1989), provides that board members of the county board of education can be required to testify as to their knowledge of the reason why a person selected for employment was viewed as being more qualified than the other applicants. In Hrko, the superintendent recommended to the board the hiring of a particular employee. Another employee brought a writ of mandamus action asserting that he was more senior and qualified for the position. The Supreme Court ruled that the employee not selected had the right to depose (question under oath) the board members to determine why he was not selected for the position. Similarly, board members have been subpoenaed and required to testify to matters discussed in executive session before the Public Employees Grievance Board.

Although often times board members may consider executive session to be a safe haven, in reality, the purpose of executive session is to protect the employee, not the employer (board of education). There is no such thing as an “executive session privilege”. As the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeal recently stated in Marshall v. Carter (W. Va. 2010), “recognition of an executive session privilege would have the pernicious effect of immunizing public agencies from civil liability for any conduct engaged in during executive session.” The Court further stated, “recognition of an executive session privilege is not necessary to protect matters discussed in an executive session from public scrutiny.”

So as you and your board members enter executive session, as is often done, keep in mind that what is discussed does not always remain behind closed doors. Although it may be a rare occasion that is factually and legal specific, it is something to keep in mind. 

© 2013 Dinsmore & Shohl LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Jason's practice concentrates on two areas of law that are quite diverse from each other. One area of Jason’s practice focuses on enforcing the collection rights and security interests of creditors. In this area of the law, he also has experience in defending creditors and debt collection entities in litigation where claims have been asserted against such entities for alleged violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protect Act (“WVCCPA”) and/or the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In addition, he has experience in defending automobile...

304-225-1417

About the Author

Of Counsel

Denise Spatafore is a member of the Labor and Employment Department. She focuses her practice on education law. Prior to joining the firm, Denise served as the Supervisor of Personnel for the Harrison County Board of Education. As the administrator in charge, she led the personnel department of a school system with approximately 2,000 employees, providing both human resources management and legal services. Earlier in her career, Denise served as an Administrative Law Judge for the West Virginia Public Employees Grievance Board.

304-225-1445

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.