A student-filed lawsuit against the Board of Trustees to withhold former President Doug Baker’s severance pay could soon end with a judge’s ruling.

Misty Haji-Sheikh, graduate student at large, filed the lawsuit June 27 to place an injunction against the university for violating the Illinois Open Meetings Act. The statute was enacted to create governmental transparency and allows citizens to participate in public meetings. Meeting agendas need to have a list of the topics of discussion that will occur during a closed session.

A summary judgement has since been filed for, which is when each side files a summary that contains their argument for victory in the case. Both parties forgo the hearing process and instead present their case to a judge, who then has final say in the results of the trial.

The alleged Open Meetings Act violation occurred when discussion of Baker’s severance was left off of the June 15 official Board meeting agenda and then later discussed behind closed doors without notifying the public. Later, it was announced Baker’s severance pay had been determined: $617,500.

A portion of Baker’s severance pay has already been dispersed, so if the Board loses the case, it will be up to the judge to decide what happens with the money, Haji-Sheikh said.

Other money, such as legal fees, cannot be dispersed to Baker until the restraining order on payment is lifted Nov. 22.

“I don’t stand to make anything from this,” Haji-Sheikh said. “We’re just trying to get the law to be followed.”

Haji-Sheikh filed a motion for summary judgment Sept. 15; the university has until Friday to respond to her motion.

Haji-Sheikh’s motion for a summary judgement is asking the Board to acknowledge the public notice it issued for Baker’s severance pay violated the Open Meetings Act; void the severance package Baker received; require the Board not violate the act in the future and pay Haji-Sheikh’s attorney fees, according to court documents.

During a Sept. 8 status hearing, NIU’s legal defense team discussed filing for summary judgment with DeKalb County Judge Bradley Waller.

“Both sides have told the judge that they think they have enough to file a summary judgment,” Haji-Sheikh said.

If the Board responds to her motion, Haji-Sheikh will then be given 30 days to file her response to the Board of Trustees’ motion for a summary judgment in support of her own motion. The Board will then have two weeks to reply, ending in the oral argument Nov. 22, Haji-Sheikh’s attorney Charles Philbrick said.

The argument will be the final deciding factor in determining whether a violation of the Open Meetings Act occurred.

“We brought a motion for a temporary restraining order, and in order to process that motion, we had to show a likelihood of success on the merit,” Philbrick said. “And because the judge thought we showed likelihood of success on the merit, it gives us confidence going into the summary judgment.”

Haji-Sheikh said Nov. 22 could be the end of the lawsuit, or it could last longer; it depends on the judge’s final say and whether the losing party decides to file an appeal. If there is an appeal, proceedings could end up taking a lot longer.

“So far, I would say things are going great,” Haji-Sheikh said. “But that’s a one-sided way of looking at it because we’re really just waiting for a statement from NIU.”

NIU Spokesperson Joe King declined to comment on the ongoing litigation.