granting defendants summary judgment on plaintiff’s IIED claim where plaintiff had not received treatment from a psychiatrist or physiologist
How later courts described this case
- granting defendants summary judgment on plaintiff’s IIED claim where plaintiff had not received treatment from a psychiatrist or physiologist
- “the term ‘special meeting’ was only intended to refer to those meetings which were not regularly scheduled”
- “Typically, one would expect regular meetings to be scheduled well in advance …”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*598
Harsha, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in judgment and opinion with the majority concerning the second, third, fourth, and fifth assignments of error. However, I must respectfully dissent from the disposition of the first assignment of error because I believe the record establishes a genuine issue of material fact concerning the appellees’ compliance with its own notification rule. This rule requires “the widest possible dissemination through the available media.” The majority concludes that the appellant failed to raise specific facts to establish a genuine issue regarding the reasonableness of sending notice only to The Athens Messenger. I believe the appellees’ own summary judgment evidence raises such a factual question. Specifically, the affidavit of Cindy J. Rhonemus, filed in support of appellees’ motion, contains a list of people and organizations to whom notice of the regular meeting was sent. This list establishes that in addition to The Athens Messenger, there are three other newspapers and three radio stations serving the community. Thus, I believe the existence of these additional media sources raises a genuine issue of material fact concerning the reasonableness of notifying only The Athens Messenger about the special meeting. Reasonable minds could clearly disagree about this notice satisfying the rule requiring the “widest possible dissemination.” Thus, I dissent.