Guest John Posted June 4, 2017 at 02:40 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2017 at 02:40 PM Can a meeting be overturned, declare void, after the fact if discovered the rules were not followed correctly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted June 4, 2017 at 03:15 PM Report Share Posted June 4, 2017 at 03:15 PM Depends upon which rules were not followed. Care to give details? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted June 5, 2017 at 01:07 AM Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 at 01:07 AM 10 hours ago, Guest John said: Can a meeting be overturned, declare void, after the fact if discovered the rules were not followed correctly? Generally, no. Most violations of the rules must be challenged at the time. There are a few continuing breaches for particularly severe violations. Additionally, even fewer violations would be of such a nature as to make the meeting itself void (as opposed to the business conducted at the meeting). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris NM Posted June 8, 2017 at 06:52 AM Report Share Posted June 8, 2017 at 06:52 AM Let's say a special meeting is held. A quorum is present and accepted in good faith at the time of the meeting, but subsequent to the meeting it is determined there was not a quorum because one attendee did not meet the qualifications. The Special Meeting involved recall of Board members, in other words, a serious action. The actual vote to recall done in the meeting met the majority requirements. The meeting met all the requirements of the bylaws except for the quorum. The convening group for the special meeting when it learned there was not a quorum declared the meeting was not valid. Should the meeting and results have stood according to Robert's Rules. The quorum was not challenged at the time of the meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 8, 2017 at 11:30 AM Report Share Posted June 8, 2017 at 11:30 AM 4 hours ago, Chris NM said: but subsequent to the meeting it is determined there was not a quorum 4 hours ago, Chris NM said: Should the meeting and results have stood No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted June 8, 2017 at 11:50 AM Report Share Posted June 8, 2017 at 11:50 AM Well, there is nothing at all indicating that the meeting itself was void, or anything at all indicating that the "convening group for the special meeting" has any authority to make determinations relating to the validity of meetings or the presence or absence of a quorum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 8, 2017 at 01:55 PM Report Share Posted June 8, 2017 at 01:55 PM Yeesh. That too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted June 9, 2017 at 12:02 AM Report Share Posted June 9, 2017 at 12:02 AM 17 hours ago, Chris NM said: Let's say a special meeting is held. A quorum is present and accepted in good faith at the time of the meeting, but subsequent to the meeting it is determined there was not a quorum because one attendee did not meet the qualifications. The Special Meeting involved recall of Board members, in other words, a serious action. The actual vote to recall done in the meeting met the majority requirements. The meeting met all the requirements of the bylaws except for the quorum. The convening group for the special meeting when it learned there was not a quorum declared the meeting was not valid. Should the meeting and results have stood according to Robert's Rules. The quorum was not challenged at the time of the meeting. The meeting itself is valid. If there is clear and convincing proof that a quorum was not present, however, the actions taken in the absence of a quorum are null and void. It is up to the assembly itself to make this determination, however, not the "convening group." Would one attendee have made a difference? Additionally, what exactly is meant by the claim that "one attendee did not meet the qualifications?" As to these recall procedures, I trust that this was in compliance with custom rules in your organization's bylaws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvertomster Posted June 12, 2017 at 03:07 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 03:07 AM On 6/8/2017 at 8:02 PM, Josh Martin said: The meeting itself is valid. If there is clear and convincing proof that a quorum was not present, however, the actions taken in the absence of a quorum are null and void. It is up to the assembly itself to make this determination, however, not the "convening group." What does it mean to say that a meeting is "valid", if the actions taken at he meeting are null and void? (I realize that there's some small number of things that you can do without a quorum, but what would constitute an "invalid" meeting?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted June 12, 2017 at 03:46 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 03:46 AM 35 minutes ago, Silvertomster said: What does it mean to say that a meeting is "valid", if the actions taken at he meeting are null and void? (I realize that there's some small number of things that you can do without a quorum, but what would constitute an "invalid" meeting?) In this case, it would mean that the meeting was properly called. If a group of members got together and said, without authority, "We a having this meeting," it would not be a valid meeting. If the bylaws required 30 days notice for a meeting, and only 10 days notice was given, that would not be a valid meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 12, 2017 at 06:41 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 06:41 AM 3 hours ago, Silvertomster said: What does it mean to say that a meeting is "valid", if the actions taken at he meeting are null and void? (I realize that there's some small number of things that you can do without a quorum, but what would constitute an "invalid" meeting?) It might be a minor point, if what your concern is that what was done at the meeting seems to have been invalid (so do you care whether the meeting -- the structure -- is called valid or invalid, when we're saying that the content of the meeting -- what was done -- was intrinsically invalid? -- geeez, what a question!). (O darnit, I have entirely lost track. Are there any loose ends here?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted June 12, 2017 at 10:53 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 10:53 AM A regular or properly called meeting is a valid meeting even if a quorum is not present, and actions taken during such a meeting at a time when a quorum was not present can be later ratified. It must first be legitimately determined that a quorum was not present when action was taken at such a meeting, however, before ratification of such action is either necessary or appropriate. Actions taken at a meeting which is not a regular or properly called meeting cannot be ratified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 12, 2017 at 11:46 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 11:46 AM 51 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: ctions taken at a meeting which is not a regular or properly called meeting cannot be ratified. Whoop! That's news. Is it stated, or inferable, from p. 124 - 125? Can they really put this on my RP test? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted June 12, 2017 at 11:55 AM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 11:55 AM Oh, it's not news at all. I distinctly remember making this clear here in this forum quite some time ago. You must not have been paying attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:06 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:06 PM 7 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: You must not have been paying attention. I always pay attention. But lamentably I so rarely remember. And who could anticipate that you would be awake before your bedtime again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:40 PM Report Share Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:40 PM Yeah, well don't expect any more from me for awhile. It's time for me to go fishing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts