Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Legal Services Youth Social Media topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Spring Branch ISD Board approves contingent-fee legal contract to pursue youth social media litigation

Board of Trustees, SPRING BRANCH INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT · January 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board voted 6-0 to adopt a resolution and enter contingent-fee agreements with three law firms to represent the district in multi-district litigation concerning youth social media usage, invoking findings under Texas Government Code 2254 for expedited Attorney General review.

The Spring Branch Independent School District Board of Trustees voted unanimously on Jan. 29 to adopt a resolution approving a contingent-fee legal services contract and to authorize agreements with Thompson & Horton, LLP; Eiland & Bonnin, PC; and O'Hanlon, Demerath & Castillo, PC to represent the district in multi-district litigation concerning youth social media usage.

Secretary Shannon Mahan moved adoption of the resolution, which Secretary Mahan seconded and Trustee David Slattery supported; the motion passed 6-0. The resolution includes the findings required under Texas Government Code 2254, Subchapter C and requests expedited review by the Texas Attorney General. "Motion passed by a 6-0 vote," the minutes record.

Board members conducted the legal discussions in closed session under Texas Open Meetings Act provisions before reconvening; President Lisa Andrews Alpe stated that no action was taken during closed session, and the Board subsequently acted in open session to approve the resolution and the contingent-fee agreements. The agreements name the three firms and specify that representation concerns youth social media usage and related litigation; the Board did not record further public discussion of the merits at the open meeting.