n. if two parties to an agreement (contract) both have the same understanding of the terms of the agreement. Such mutual understanding is essential for a valid contract. This can be proven by express provisions of a written contract, without reference to statements or hidden thoughts outside the document. There would be no chiefs` meeting if Bill Buyer said, “I`m going to buy all your shares,” and he meant shares in a company, and Sam Seller said, “I`m going to sell you all my stock,” which is his livestock. (a) any meeting for the purpose of a judgment, judicial proceeding, administrative tribunal or judicial proceeding; “Meetings” are defined as “meetings, including working sessions, when physically or by electronic means of communication in accordance with § 2.2-3708.2 as an organ or corporation or as an informal meeting of (i) not more than three members, or (ii) a quorum, if less than three, of the constituent members. by any public body. Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3701. A “meeting” is defined as a formal or informal meeting of a quorum of the members of a public body for the purpose of discussing or taking action in public affairs. 29 Del.
C. § 10002 (j). The term “public body” is defined. Id. § 10002 k). The Act also defines “public business” as any matter over which the public body exercises a power of supervision, control, competence or advice. 29 Del. C. § 10002(m); see, for example, Del.
Op. Att`y Gen., No. 01-ib13 (9 August 2001) (the decision that the review of a waste management facility is “public business”, subject to open meeting legislation); Del. Op. Att`y Gen., No. 02-ib07 (22 March 2002) (informal lunch with members of Sussex County Council and a private organization was a “meeting” subject to FOIA laws and, as such, minutes should have been taken); see also Del. 18-ib23 (May 4, 2018) (“serial meetings” of Council members with a councillor were not a violation as they did not constitute a quorum); Att`y Gen., No. 18-ib07 (9 February 2018) (The Council`s press conference was not a meeting). General. RSA 91-A:2,I defines a “meeting” as “the calling of a quorum of the members of a public body as defined in RSA 91-A:1-a,VI or of a majority of the members of such a body where the by-laws of that body define the “quorum” as exceeding a majority of its members, whether in person, by telephone, electronic communication or otherwise; so that, subject to the provisions of FLSA 91-A:2, III, all participating members may communicate with each other simultaneously to discuss or make a decision on one or more matters over which the public body exercises oversight, control, competence or advisory power.
A fortuitous, social or other meeting that is not called to discuss or act on such matters does not constitute an assembly unless decisions are made on such matters. An “assembly” under Section 21.2(2) of the Iowa Code includes all formal or informal meetings at which the majority of members deliberate or take action in the exercise of their political functions. See op. cit. Atty. Gen. (Pellett) 16 May 1979. In Hutchison v. Shull, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a meeting can be held even if a majority of the members of the council or council are not physically or electronically present, if the majority of the council members are present in person or through a representative. 878 N.W.2d 221, 234 (Iowa 2016).
The requirements of the Open Meeting Act apply when a majority of council members meet in person, electronically or by proxy to discuss matters within the scope of their political functions. Id. With respect to the Legislative Assembly, “Assembly” means any assembly subject to Article 14 of Article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota, which states: “All meetings of the Legislative Assembly, including the Committee of the Whole and meetings of legislative committees, shall be public and public.” N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(9). A “meeting” within the meaning of the Act “means and includes any meeting, whether physical or by means of communication devices, attended by all members of a public body or open to all members of a public body, held for the benefit of the members of the body present to discuss the specific public business of that body or to act as a unit. Meeting means or does not include such a meeting (1) attended by less than an effective majority of the members of a public body, or (2) attended by all members of three or more similar public bodies attending or being open to a convention or similar meeting. N.J.S.A.10:4-8b. However, contractual disputes can arise later if problems arise.
In some cases, elements of a contract may be called into question. A leaders` meeting means that both parties understand and agree, so capacity is usually an element that can be investigated when one party suggests a misunderstanding. Some parties may be able to prove that a successful meeting never took place because the parties involved had two completely different interpretations that led to a clear misunderstanding that can invalidate a contract. When the court is involved, it usually bases the interpretation of contract terms on the reasonable understanding of a person with industry standard knowledge. When a quorum of members of a public body meets to discuss public business, it is a “meeting” under the Open Meeting Act (AMO). Nicholas v. Meridian Charter Twp. Vol., 239 Mich. App. 525, 609 N.W.2D 574 (2000).
However, a random meeting of members of public bodies where members do not participate in deliberations or make decisions is not a “meeting” and is therefore not subject to GOA requirements. Ryant v. Cleveland Twp., 239 Mich. App. 430, 608 N.W.2d 101 (2000). Even email exchanges with a quorum of members, to which not all members respond (apparently do not participate), can constitute a “meeting” as long as there is a “consultation”. Markel v. Mackley, No. 327617, 2016 WL 6495941, at *1 (Michigan ct.
App. November 1, 2016). Although the regulations for open sessions are closely related to the Freedom of Information Act of 1966, there is no national minimum standard defining “transparency” and is not mentioned in the First Amendment. Much of the litigation over open session legislation involved whether certain exceptions justified the closure of certain meetings of government agencies. Exempt meetings are generally held in camera and may involve personnel matters, ongoing investigations, collective bargaining, conferences with Agency counsel, the purchase or sale of public property, or debate among Agency members prior to a decision. The term “meeting” is defined in the Open Meeting Act as “calling a public body or a particular body having a quorum, including a workshop or executive meeting, in person or by electronic communication, for the purpose of discussing, receiving comments from the public or responding to a matter for which the public body or particular body has jurisdiction or advice.” Utah Code, § 52-4-103(6)(a).