Court rules on Meetings Act's "anticipated litigation" exception.

In a January 28, 2016 decision, Monmouth County Superior Court Judge Paul X. Escandon ruled in Kash v. Borough of Freehold, et al, Docket No. MON-L-2814-15 that Freehold Borough’s Redevelopment Entity’s decision to enter into nonpublic (closed or executive) session because of the “anticipated litigation” exception embodied within N.J.S.A. 10:4-12(b)(7) did not violate the Open Public Meetings Act.  Even though a land use challenger did not directly threaten the Borough with litigation, his lawyer’s inquiries to the Borough’s lawyer about whether he would be permitted to cross-examine the applicant’s witnesses and the appeal process if his bid to cross-examine was denied justified the closed session.

Related News:  Five reasons why America's political system is failing

Judge Escandon also ruled, among other issues presented, that Borough Mayor J. Nolan Higgins’ ownership of a funeral home near the property that was the subject of the application did not constitute a conflict of interest that precluded Mayor Higgins from participating in the application.

Attributions in this article: Map data ©2019 Google, Photo © BigStock Photos. Hand out photos courtesy of reporting agency. Press releases are the intellectual property of the issuing agency or corporation. Please report any photo, copyright or intellectual property violations to