Podcasts Government Oral Arguments of the Supreme Court of Virginia September 2019 - Transparent GMU et al v George Mason University et al

September 2019 - Transparent GMU et al v George Mason University et al

Published: Sept. 29, 2019, 8:17 p.m.

This podcast is provided by Ben Glass and Steve Emmert

 

www.BenGlassReferrals.com - www.Virginia-Appeals.com

 

Granted Appeal Summary

 

Case

 

TRANSPARENT GMU, ET AL. v. GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY, ET AL. (Record Number 181375)

 

From

 

The Circuit Court of Fairfax County; J. Tran, Judge.

 

Counsel

 

Evan D. Johns (Appalachian Mountain Advocates) for appellant.

 

Carrie S. Nee and David G. Drummey (Office of the Attorney General), Brian Walther (University Counsel), Toby J. Heytens, Matthew R. McGuire, and Michelle S. Kallen (Office of the Solicitor General), E. Rebecca Gantt, Matthew A. Fitzgerald, and Sean F. Murphy (McGuireWoods LLP) for appellees.

 

Assignments of Error

 

1. The circuit court erred by concluding that accepting, administering, and disbursing funds for the sole benefit of a public university is not a form of “public business” under the Act.

 

2. The circuit court erred by sustaining the University’s plea and demurrer to Count I of the Amended Petition and concluding that the Act did not consider the University the custodian of records held by its agents in the transaction of public business.

 

3. The circuit court erred by sustaining the Foundation’s demurrer to Count V of the Amended Petition and concluding that the Act did not consider the Foundation the custodian of records it held as the University’s agent in the transaction of public business.

 

4. The circuit court erred by sustaining the University’s plea and demurrer in Count II of the Amended Petition and concluding that the University was not the custodian of records possessed by its Vice President for University Development in the transaction of public business.

 


5. The circuit court erred by sustaining the Foundation’s demurrer to the alter-ego claim in the Original Petition and concluding that the Act did not allow an alter-ego claim absent an allegation of “impermissible” conduct.

 

6. The circuit court erred by dismissing Count III of the Amended Petition and concluding that the Foundation was not an “other entity . . . of [a] public body created to perform delegated functions of the public body” under the Act.

 

Source Document: http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/scv/appeals/181375.pdf