February 2004 invoice is missing.
Diane Crosier refused to produce missing invoices.
Diane Crosier refused to produce missing invoices.
BLOGS
2005 Stutz invoices
Payments to Shinoff
Public Records Requests
Maura Larkins v.
CVESD
CVESD
Maura Larkins v. Chula Vista Elementary School District
Why was there a balance forward in January 2004?
Did SDCOE refuse to pay $2,192.43 in 2003?
Why did SDCOE refuse to produce invoices for 2004 and 2005?
Did SDCOE refuse to pay $2,192.43 in 2003?
Why did SDCOE refuse to produce invoices for 2004 and 2005?
2004 Invoices
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz
Education Reform Report
Invoices show amounts charged to SDCOE-JPA by Stutz law firm in the
case of Maura Larkins v. Richard Werlin, et al.
case of Maura Larkins v. Richard Werlin, et al.
| < < < |
2005: Did SDCOE pay Stutz law firm for this pleading?
The pleading was fraudulently filed, purportedly on behalf
of Chula Vista Elementary School District. But CVESD was
not a party in the case, and the true purpose of the
pleading was solely to protect Stutz law firm. SDCOE has
illegally refused to produce the invoice regarding February
2005, the month the pleading was filed.
The pleading was fraudulently filed, purportedly on behalf
of Chula Vista Elementary School District. But CVESD was
not a party in the case, and the true purpose of the
pleading was solely to protect Stutz law firm. SDCOE has
illegally refused to produce the invoice regarding February
2005, the month the pleading was filed.