Oak Hill trial will continue into January; arcane questions may decide

Testimony will not conclude this week

When all is said and done with the Oak Hill litigation, and one can only assume that day will come, the decision may hinge on nuanced and arcane questions often drowned out by the testimony about allegedly misbehaving country clubbers.

Those questions, far less titillating than allegations of the well-to-do angrily berating staff or acting like drunken teenagers, may look like this:

• What would be a proper notice to inform a governor (similar to a member of a board of directors) that he or she faces disciplinary measures?

• How much opportunity should a board member, targeted for discipline, have to call witnesses or present evidence on his or her behalf?

• What would be the proper procedures for governors to seek out and obtain detailed information about the club’s finances?

• How much leeway, under the laws governing nonprofit boards, does a judge have to determine when and if laws have been breached and, if so, what would be the proper judicial response?

Granted, these questions don’t raise eyebrows as has the testimony highlighted in some of my past coverage. And, granted, I’ve probably cherry-picked some of the more salacious testimony because it is the most interesting - and sometimes the only interesting nuggets.