The Richmond School Board is seeking to dispel a legal cloud hanging over the collective heads of its nine members.

That cloud: An African-American parent’s claim that the board engaged in resegregation of city schools in 2013 when it overhauled attendance zones for elementary schools and closed Clark Springs Elementary School in the near West End.

The parent, Kimberly Johnson Jones, asked the court to overturn the attendance zone changes a few weeks after the board’s final vote. She claimed that a few members of the board held illegal secret meetings to devise the plan.

She alleged the plan was designed to cluster white children in a few schools, notably Mary Munford and William Fox elementary schools, and damaged her child’s opportunity for a quality education by closing Clark Springs.

The board, which has strongly denied the allegations, now is asking the Richmond Circuit Court to throw out the petition Ms. Jones filed with the court. Ms. Jones’ petition asks the court to void the board’s vote on the attendance plan as “arbitrary and capricious” and in violation of public policy.

Ms. Jones’ petition, which was backed by the nonprofit Richmond Coalition for Quality Education, has been on hold since October.

The board’s new request claims that Ms. Jones’ petition should be tossed because Ms. Jones’ child no longer attends a city school and that the petition was not filed in a timely manner. The board also claims there is no evidence that racial animus motivated the board’s vote.

Ms. Jones’ attorney, Charles H. Schmidt Jr., said he and his client would oppose the board’s effort.

Mr. Schmidt acknowledged Ms. Jones’ child no longer attends a city public school. However, he said that does not matter. He said the court earlier had found Ms. Jones had standing to submit her petition because her child was attending a city elementary school when the petition was filed.

He said the court previously ruled the petition was submitted before a 30-day deadline expired and argues the board is asking the court to reconsider that decision without “offering any new facts or justifications.”

Mr. Schmidt noted that the board’s new filing also includes an admission that three members of the board, Glen H. Sturtevant Jr., 1st District, Kimberly B. Gray, 2nd District, and Kristen Larson, 4th District, devised the attendance zone changes the board ultimately approved.

“The board is admitting to most of what we claimed in our initial complaint — namely that Mr. Sturtevant and Ms. Gray met in a coffee shop” and called Ms. Larson to consult with her, Mr. Schmidt said. State law defines a public meeting when three members of an elected body gather in some fashion, he said. Such a gathering requires public notice, he said.

“They did most of their business surrounding the rezoning plan over the phone and email without public knowledge or input,” he said. “That is the basis of our claim and why we think the board was acting in bad faith” and in violation of the state’s open meeting law. The failure to follow state law and the board’s own policies, he said, “demonstrate (the board) acted arbitrarily and capriciously.”

The court has not yet set a date to consider the School Board’s request.