1. CSUN Judicial Council
Cohen v. CSUN Executive Board, CSUN Senate (2015)
Argued: 2/12/2015
Decided: 2/12/2015
Vote of the Council: 8-0-0
JUSTICE GREEN delivered the opinion of the council.
I. Background
On February 12, 2015, the Judicial Council of the Consolidated Student of the
University of Nevada (CSUN) held a public and private hearing in the CSUN conference
room. The Petitioner, the Respondents - representatives from the CSUN Executive
Board and representatives from the CSUN Senate - as well as eight members of the
Judicial Council were all present at these hearings.
II. Issues
The Petitioner brought forth four (4) separate claims in these hearings which
include the following: A claim that the Executive Board violated Nevada Open Meeting
Law in accordance with NRS 241.020(2)(a) and the nominations of different positions
with CSUN are ambiguous given their provisions within the CSUN Constitution, a claim
that the CSUN Senate operated in without quorum during the October 20, 2014 Senate
meeting, a claim that re-allocation and use of funds should be handled by the Ways and
Means committee of the CSUN Senate, and a claim that the Senate violated the CSUN

2. Constitution by appointing the Public Relations Director to a term set to expire on April
20, 2015.
III. Rule
A. CSUN constitution Article IV, Section G(1)(d): “In the event of the vacancy in
the office of temporary absence of the Vice President, the Executive Board
shall nominate a CSUN member to fill the vacancy”
B. CSUN Bylaw 101.02.b.7: “Performing all other duties assigned by the Senate
President, so long as the duties do not conflict with their position as a
Senator.”
C. CSUN Bylaw 103.04.b.3: “[The Ways and Means Committee shall:] Make the
recommendations necessary for the proper control and management of CSUN
funds.”
D. CSUN Constitution Article VI, Section D(4)(f): “[The Senate, by two-thirds
(2/3) vote, shall be empowered to:] grant or rescind permission given to the
Executive Board to make expenditures of up to $500 without specific
approval, provided such expenditures are reported to the Senate at the
following senate meeting”
E. CSUN Constitution Article IV, Section F(1): “The term for Executive offices
shall be from May 1 to April 30. Outgoing Executive officers may serve as
advisors to their successors during the first two weeks of their successors’
terms of office.”

3. F. CSUN Constitution Article V, Section E(8): “[The Senate President] shall be
empowered to assign excused and unexcused absences to Senators for senate
meetings;”
G. CSUN Constitution Article VII, Section D(1)(a):”[The Judicial Council:] shall
interpret the Constitution;”
H. CSUN Constitution Article IV, Section C(4):”Shall complete at least seven (7)
credits a semester at UNLV while holding office, excluding summer sessions.”
I. Board of Regents’ Handbook Title 4, Chapter 17, Section 18(2): “All students
registering for seven (7) credits or more at the state college and universities
are members of their respective student government associations or graduate
student associations if organized.”
J. CSUN Constitution Article VI, Section E(2): “The Senate shall require a
quorum of two-thirds (2/3) of the current Senate membership. Senate
meetings held during the summer sessions and winter break shall require a
quorum of fifty percent (50%) plus one (1) of the current Senate
membership.”
K. Robert’s Rules of Order, page 67: The motion to ratify is a useful motion
when the assembly has to confirm action taken when there was no quorum
present; when the assembly has to take emergency action without a quorum
present; when officers, committee members, or delegates have acted in excess
of their instructions; or when a local unit needs the approval of the state or
national organization before something can be done.
L. CSUN Bylaws 201.04.a: “There is hereby established an office of Public
Relations Director, who shall be appointed by the President with the consent

4. of the Senate and shall serve a term which shall not exceed the term ending
date of the current Executive Board.”
M. CSUN Bylaw 211.01.a.1-3: “The following officials shall serve a term beginning
on May 1st and ending on April 30th. 1) President 2) Vice President 3) Senate
President”
N. CSUN Constitution Article IV, Section A(1): “The Executive Officers shall be
the President, Vice President, and Senate President.”
O. Article XI, Roberts Rules of Orders, “A Quorum of an assembly is such a
number as must be present in order that business can be legally transacted.”

5. IV. Application
The CSUN Constitution outlines the threshold of which CSUN officials may
operate and of which they are restricted, including that of the office of the, President,
Vice President, the Senate President, and the CSUN Senate. The responsibilities and
powers of the office of the President, Vice President, and Senate President are outlined
in Article V, Section C, Section D, Section E of the CSUN Constitution. The rules
concerning the way the CSUN Senate is to operate is further explained in the CSUN
Constitution, Article VI, Section E (1-4). Specific to this situation, subsection 2 [E(2)] of
this provision is worth observation and interpretation as it places limitations,
restriction, and requirements for the CSUN Senate to adhere to in order to conduct
business. These constitutional provisions include that of quorum, and other rules
pertinent to the matter under review of the Council.
Additionally, The CSUN Bylaw further supplements and addresses the operating
powers of the President, Vice President and Senate President – the Executive Board.
The CSUN Constitution and Bylaws serve as an outline to address the operating powers
and limitations of CSUN officers, which includes that of the Executive Board. The
Executive Board is subject to such parameters, as specifically outlined within these
documents. However, it is important to note that any restrictions, limitations or powers
not specifically outlined within these documents are in no means boundaries to the
powers of these officers and are subject to judicial interpretation. The same authority is
granted to this judicial body as it pertains to the legislative branch.

6. Furthermore, and for clarities sake, we reiterate, the CSUN Constitution outlines
the threshold of which CSUN officials may operate and of which they are restricted,
including that of the office of the Senate President and the Senate body as a whole.
The responsibilities of the Senate President are specifically stated in Article B and
Article E. Additionally, The CSUN Bylaw further supplement and address the operating
powers of the office of the Senate President. Given the powers granted to the Judicial
Council of CSUN in the Constitution, Article VII, Section D, Subsection 1, interpretation
of such limitations, restrictions and powers can be issued by this judicial body.
Furthermore, the scope of which the Judicial Council may operate is further
outlined with in the Judicial Council Operating Policy, Article II, Section A, Subsection
1-5. These include the CSUN Constitution and the CSUN Bylaws. The CSUN
Constitution is subject to other laws and documents as described in the Constitution
Article III, Section E, Subsections 1-6. Given these powers, the Judicial Council may
operate only within the scope of the CSUN Bylaws and the CSUN Constitution, of which
we are empowered.

7. V. Conclusion
Advice from UNLV’s Legal Council has led the Judicial Council of CSUN to avoid
releasing decisions or interpretations involving the provisions of NRS Statutes and
Nevada codes, which lie outside of the scope of interpretation of the High Court of
CSUN. Hence, the first claim laid out by the Petitioner, the claim that the Executive
Board violated Nevada Open Meeting Law in accordance with NRS 241.020(2)(a) and
the nominations of different positions with CSUN are ambiguous given their provisions
within the CSUN Constitution, was disregarded during the public hearing during
deliberations, and throughout the duration of this opinion.
With regards to the Petitioner’s second claim, the council would like to direct
attention to CSUN Constitution Article VI, Section E(2): “The Senate shall require a
quorum of two-thirds (2/3) of the current Senate membership. Senate meetings held
during the summer sessions and winter break shall require a quorum of fifty percent
(50%) plus one (1) of the current Senate membership.” According to the information
provide in the Petitioner’s brief presented in the public hearing, as of October 20, 2014
– the date of the senate meeting in observation – there were twenty-three (23) members
in the Senate. The aforementioned provision of the CSUN Constitution - CSUN
Constitution Article VI, Section E(2) - states that quorum in order to have a Senate
meeting must be at two-thirds (2/3) of the current senate membership. The basic
arithmetic is clear! Quorum must have been at fifteen-and-a-third (15 1/3). Roberts
Rules of Order, Article XI states clearly that unless quorum is established, no business
can be transacted. Furthermore, according to documents made evident and available to
the Council at the time of this public hearing, we have concluded that the Senate
meeting did not meet the necessary number of present senate members in order to

8. conduct business. Specifically, the account that the Petitioner stated within his brief
reports only fifteen (15) members present at roll call and the arrival of an additional
senator short thereafter.
Given that these were the only pieces of evidence available to the High Court, we
proceeded with the eye-witness account. It is clear that the number of members of the
Senate was less than that the required two-thirds (2/3) in order to conduct business per
the CSUN Constitution. To be bringing further clarity, we must acknowledge that there
is no “rounding down” measure that can remedy such an action. As there can physically
be no one-third of a person, it is necessary that any fraction exceeding a whole number
of required senate members, in order to establish quorum, must be rounded up to the
nearest whole number. This simply follows logically. If you fill a 1.1 liter bottle with 1
liter of water, you still have not reached full capacity. Therefore, any roll call that does
not reflect such measure is a violation of quorum and therefore a violation of the CSUN
constitution. Hence, the business conduct at the Senate meeting, on October 20, 2014
was not done properly due to absence of quorum.
The Judicial Council has proposed two remedies to address such an
issue. (1)Roberts Rules of Order provides one solution, ratifying the actions
of this meeting, in a future senate meeting that meets quorum and falls
under the specification outline in the CSUN Constitution. (2)The second
remedy is to hand this case over to the Ad Hoc committee within the Senate
body and hand over the authority and power of judgment over to that
Committee to handle within the threshold of their CSUN Constitutional
powers.

9. The court would also like to address the issue of quorum in this case, and provide
an interpretation and precedence as it pertains to this matter. The word “quorum”
appears in the CSUN Constitution and, therefore, it is within the threshold of the power
of the Judicial Council to interpret what definition should follow from such verbiage.
We have ruled that the word “quorum” applies to any member of the CSUN
Senate that is present, in their seat, in a position or is oriented in a manner
that is contributing to forwarding business or the CSUN Senate meeting
agenda at the discretion of the CSUN Senate President. Therefore, in the future,
quorum is only to be questioned if it is deemed to violate the definition stated above.
The council addresses the third claim of the petitioner thusly. The Petitioner cites
Bylaw 103.04.b.3, CSUN constitution Article VI, Section D(4)(f), and a previous judicial
interpretation, eloquently authored by Associate Justice Kiersten Madrid, as the main
premises in his argument. However, we have held that these provisions provide no
support for the claim of the Petitioner, that Executive board “steps upon the role of the
Ways and Means Committee by requesting reallocation of funds in substantial
amounts.” The Ways and Means committee can provide recommendation for
funding, but that is implied in the CSUN Constitution as an option, not a
sole duty. There is, therefore, no violation. It is so ruled by the High Court of CSUN.
Furthermore, it is apparent to the Judicial Council that the CSUN Bylaws are
clear in CSUN Bylaw 201.04.a. This provision, coupled with the establishment of the
term dates of the Executive Board outlined in CSUN Bylaw 211.01.a and the further
definition of the Executive Board outline in CSUN constitution Article IV, Section A (1),
it holds that the office of the Public Relations director should have a term ending on
April 30, 2015. Our Judicial Recommendation is to implore the Executive Branch and

10. the Senate body to amend the term limits of which the Public Relations director is
currently held prior to the April 20, 2015 date. The amendment should place his term to
expire at the same time of the current Executive Board - on April 30, 2015. It is so ruled
and recommended by the High Court of UNLV CSUN.
Signatures:
Chief Justice Taylor Cunningham
X________________________
Justice Caleb Green
X Caleb Green
Associate Chief Justice Nathaniel Saxe
X___________________________
Justice Paloma Guerrero
X Paloma Guerrero
Justice Jordyn Best
X________________________
Justice Elan Eldar
X_____________________________
Justice Kiersten Madrid
X Kiersten Madrid
Justice Hadrien Saperstein
X_____________________________