BD. OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY v. Bass, 366 S.W.3d 751

Accountants Bass, Bauer, and Grutzmacher were former Arthur Andersen employees who audited Enron in 1997–1998.
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy pursued disciplinary actions against them after Enron's collapse.
ALJs at SOAH issued proposals for decision finding serious audit errors but recommending limited sanctions.
Board held four public meetings, with executive sessions to seek counsel; final orders issued after deliberations.
Board reversed ALJs on some points and imposed sanctions: revocation for Bass and Bauer, three-year probated suspension for Grutzmacher.
Accountants sued for judicial review, including a TOMA claim alleging illegal closed sessions and voidable orders; trial court granted partial summary judgment for accountants on the TOMA claim, voiding the orders and enjoining re-prosecution.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the final orders were voidable under TOMA.	Bass contends final orders were void due to improper closed sessions.	Board contends open-session votes cured any issues and orders were valid.	No voidable final action; Board's open-session votes cured the defect.
Whether permanent injunction against future action was appropriate.	Accountants seek ongoing injunction to stop any further action.	Board argues no ongoing violation justifies injunction.	Injunction reversed; no ongoing or prospective TOMA violation established.
Whether the executive sessions violated the attorney-consultation exception.	Accountants argue sessions violated 551.071 and privilege prohibiting the final action.	Board contends sessions were authorized under the exception.	Dispositive issue not resolved for voiding orders; Board's open-session votes control.

Weatherford v. City of San Marcos, 157 S.W.3d 473 (Tex.App.-Austin 2004) (voidability limited to final actions; open vote can validate later steps)
Olympic Waste Servs. v. City of Grand Saline, 204 S.W.3d 496 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2006) (open-session vote not voidable despite closed-session merits discussion)
Burks v. Yarbrough, 157 S.W.3d 876 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005) (closed-session issues did not void subsequent payments or actions)
Gonzalez v. United Indep. Sch. Dist., 911 S.W.2d 118 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1995) (no TOMA violation when final vote occurred in open session after alleged closed-session violations)
Board of Trustees v. Cox Enters., Inc., 679 S.W.2d 86 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1984) (actual resolution must occur in public; open-session final action governs)
City of San Antonio v. Fourth Ct. of Appeals, 820 S.W.2d 762 (Tex.1991) (public access goals; exceptions exist for confidential attorney communications)