Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Closed Session Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Asheville City Council moves into closed session to discuss two pending legal cases
Summary
The Asheville City Council voted to enter a closed session to discuss privileged/confidential information and seek attorney-client advice related to two pending lawsuits involving the city.
During its meeting, the Asheville City Council voted to go into a closed session to discuss privileged or confidential information and to consult with the city attorney about pending litigation. Councilman Hess moved the motion, and the mayor seconded; a voice vote was taken and no opposition was recorded.
Councilman Hess read the motion aloud: "I move that the Asheville City Council go into closed session for the following reasons. 1, to prevent disclosure of information that is privileged and confidential pursuant to the laws of North Carolina were not considered a public record within the meaning of chapter 143 of the General Statutes. The statutory authorization is contained in North Carolina General Statutes 143-318.11(a)(1). The law that makes the information privileged and confidential is North Carolina General Statutes 143-318.10(e). And 2, to consult with an attorney employed by the city about matters with respect to which the attorney-client privilege between the city and its attorney must be preserved, including but not limited to providing the city attorney with instructions concerning the handling or settlement of a claim or judicial action regarding, but not limited to the following. 1, the City of Asheville versus HCA Healthcare Incorporated, case number 1:22-CV-00114-MR; and 2, Me Miao versus City of Asheville case number 1:23-CV-00259-MR." The motion also referenced North Carolina General Statutes 143-318.11(a)(3) as statutory authorization.
The mayor called for a second and then asked for a voice vote. "All those in favor, please say aye," the mayor said. Members responded "Aye," and the mayor noted no opposition before the council entered closed session.
The motion and vote allowed the council to discuss privileged information and receive legal advice on the two cases cited. No further details about the substance of those cases, settlement authority, or any follow-up direction were stated on the public record before the council moved into closed session.
After the vote the council proceeded into closed session as authorized by the statutes cited.
