Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Daniel H. Honemann

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Daniel H. Honemann

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Timonium, Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

6,511 profile views
  1. There appears to be absolutely nothing wrong with what the chair did in this instance. What was all the fuss about? No, nothing on pages 394-95 is applicable.
  2. The committee can recommend that no new members be brought in this year, and a motion can then be made "that no new members be brought in this year."
  3. WKS Crystal Lake, LLC v. LeFew, Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District (2015), which I think you'll find here. Cori, et al. v. Martin, Jr., et al., is a case decided in 2019 in the Circuit Court, Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois (No. 16-MR-111)
  4. But a main motion to amend the bylaws does not conflict with the bylaws. The manner of its adoption may have conflicted with the bylaws, but that's a different matter entirely.
  5. "A member of an assembly who acts as its parliamentarian has the same duty as the presiding officer to maintain a position of impartiality, and therefore does not make motions, participate in debate, or vote on any question except in the case of a ballot vote. He does not cast a deciding vote, even if his vote would affect the result, since that would interfere with the chair's prerogative of doing so. If a member feels that he cannot properly forgo these rights in order to serve as parliamentarian, he should not accept that position. Unlike the presiding officer, the parliamentarian cannot temporarily relinquish his position in order to exercise such rights on a particular motion." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 467.)
  6. I'd say your board has only 43 members at this time, but that's just me.
  7. They're your bylaws; you tell us.
  8. Well, it is likely that you will need a lawyer to assist you in interpreting a statute which provides that the rules in an organization's bylaws may supersede a particular statutory provision. The question to be decided is whether or not, in construing such a statute, the rules in RONR are to be considered as being incorporated into, thus effectively becoming a part of, bylaws which provide that the rules in RONR shall govern in the absence of a bylaw provision to the contrary (as Mr. Martin has already noted is the intent expressed in RONR itself). I am aware of at least two instances in which courts have adopted RONR's view of this matter, and none which have as yet ruled to the contrary (although this does not mean that there are none, or that there will be none).
  9. But if a committee of the Board does keep minutes, the Board would not have to approve those minutes. In fact, it would have no business doing so.
  10. I gather that these are committees, not subcommittees (not that it matters much).
  • Create New...