Deposition of Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz
Ray James Artiano, representative and deponent
by Maura Larkins on November 8, 2007

Part 1
Defamation suit
against this website
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Ray Artiano deposition pg 1-29
Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Artiano deposition pg 40-58
Larkins case summary
Kelly Angell
defends Robin
Donlan
Maura Larkins made a discovery request for specific
documents collected by Stutz law firm about her case. She
asked for Bate-stamped documents beginning "with the
number 1 (
not 01 or 001) and continuing through 87."  

Deposition page  6  line 18 through page 7 line 11:

Q.  Do you have a document that is Bate-stamped with a 5,
not a 05 or a 005?
A.   Not to my knowledge.  
MR. SHINOFF:  Nor do I.  
BY MS. LARKINS:  
Q.   Well, that is very interesting.  How about a
document that is Bate-stamped ... 6, not 06?
A.   Not to my knowledge.
MR. SHINOFF:  Nor do I.
Q.   Did you bring any of the documents that are
specifically numbered here in paragraph 1 on page 2 of
this exhibit?
A.   Based on what we could make out from your
request, we had the documents gathered, which Mr.
Shinoff, my attorney, brought with him.
Q.   Well, it would appear that either intentionally or
unintentionally, you ignored this last sentence in this first
document request.

See page 10 below for Mr. Artiano's lawyer's excuse for not
searching for the documents.
Shinoff cases
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

STUTZ, ARTIANO, SHINOFF & HOLTZ, APC,
Plaintiffs,          

vs.                                   

MAURA LARKINS, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.         

CASE NO.:  37-2007-00076218-CU-DF-CTL

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF RAY ARTIANO
Taken at San Diego, California
November 8, 2007

Page 1                               

EXHIBITS                                                               
1    Deposition Notice                                                            6
2    NCTimes.com Website Article dated 10-25-2007   34
3    Page from Website San Diego Education Report, Mauralarkins.com  40
4    Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury     45

INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO ANSWER
PAGE      LINE
20        19
26        13
27        18
28         7
32        17
34        10
43        11
45        12
53        16   

Page 4

12     EXAMINATION BY MS. LARKINS:
16          Q.   How are you feeling today?
17          A.   I'm feeling fine.
18          Q.   Can you think of any reason that you wouldn't
19     be able to give your best testimony today?
20          A.   No.
21          Q.   Okay.  Uhm.  
My deposition subpoena asked for
22     documents.  Did you bring documents today?
23               MR. SHINOFF:  Yes.  We did.  
24               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  Instead of handing them
25     all in a bunch, where it will be hard, I'm sure you can

Page 5

1     figure out what they are faster than I can.  Do you have
2     the bate stamped Document Number 5?  
3               MR. SHINOFF:  We have many bate stamped
4     documents in our office, and we were attempting to figure
5     out precisely what it was that you were looking for, but
6     we do have a bate stamped Document Number 5 dated April
7     26, 2001 from yourself to Mr. Werlin.
8               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  You know, I'm a little
9     confused here.  Isn't Mr. Artiano supposed to be talking?  
10               MR. SHINOFF:  No, not right now.  Not right
11     now, because you asked me about documents that are being
12     produced; and so, as counsel, I'm telling you what we
13     have produced.
14               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  
15               MR. SHINOFF:  We brought a series of documents
16     bate stamped 1 through 70 -- or through 84.  
17               (EXH. 1 was marked for identification.)
18     BY MS. LARKINS:
19          Q.   Okay.  I'd like to have this marked as Exhibit
20     Number 1.
 It is my notice of taking deposition and
21     request for production of documents.  And here is a copy
22     for you, Mr. Artiano.  Does this document look familiar
23     to you?
24          A.   Yes, it does.
25          Q.   Okay.  Would you look at the second page.  And

Page 6

1     the first paragraph, can you read the bottom sentence,
2     the last sentence in the first paragraph.  
3          A.   The deposition may also be recorded through
4     such means as to provide the instant display of the
5     testimony as also authorized by CCP Section 2025(d).
6          Q.   Excuse me.  I'm sorry.  I meant the paragraph
7     that is numbered one.  
8          A.   Well, the document speaks for itself.  I'm not
9     here to read, ma'am.
10          Q.   Okay.  Well, I'm going to consider you a
11     hostile witness, and this is how I'm going to do it.  I
12     will ask you if it says a certain thing.  I'm going to
13     need my copy.  
14               Mr. Artiano, on page 2, line 15 of Exhibit 1,
15  do you see the sentence, "The bate stamps begin with the
16         number 1, not 01 or 001, and continue through 87"?  
17          A.   Yes, I do.
18          Q.   Okay.  Do you have a document that is bate
19     stamped with a 5, not a 05 or a 005?
20          A.   Not to my knowledge.  
21               MR. SHINOFF:  Nor do I.  
22     BY MS. LARKINS:  
23          Q.   Well, that is very interesting.  How about a
24     document that is bate stamped 06 -- 6, not 06?
25          A.   Not to my knowledge.

Page 7

1               MR. SHINOFF:  Nor do I.
2     BY MS. LARKINS:  
3          Q.   Did you bring any of the documents that are
4     specifically numbered here in paragraph 1 on page 2 of
5     this exhibit?
6          A.   Based on what we could make out from your
7     request, we had the documents gathered, which          
8     Mr. Shinoff, my attorney, brought with him.
9          Q.   Well, it would appear that either intentionally
10     or unintentionally, you ignored this last sentence in
11     this first document request.
 So I'm asking you, now that
12     I'm making it really clear to you that the documents I'm
13     talking about don't have any zeroes in front of the
14     single digits, did you bring any of those?
15          A.   I just answered that.
16          Q.   It's a yes or no answer.  
17          A.   I just answered that.  
18          Q.   Could you read back Mr. Artiano's last answer.  
19               (Record read line 17 and then line 6 through
20     8.)
21     BY MS. LARKINS:  
22          Q.   Okay.  Did you bring a document that is bate
23     stamped with a 9, not a 09?
24          A.   Not to my knowledge.
25          Q.   Did you bring a document that is bate stamped

Page 8

1     09?  
2               MR. SHINOFF:  Yes.
3     BY MS. LARKINS:  
4          Q.   And what is that document, Mr. Artiano?
5          A.   That document is a letter dated -- actually, it
6     is undated; although, there is a Chula Vista Elementary
7     School Human Resources stamp that says June 4th, 2002.  
8     It is addressed to a Dr. Gill from Maura Larkins.
9          Q.   And do you believe that the Maura Larkins who
10     wrote this letter is the person who is taking your
11     deposition right now?
12          A.   I assume so.
13          Q.   Well, why would you think that I would want a
14     copy of my own letter?
15          A.   I have no idea what's in your mind, ma'am.
16          Q.   I wanted a document that your law firm has been
17     refusing to produce for several years.  I'm very
18     disappointed that you are still not producing it.  
19               MR. SHINOFF:  We'd be happy to produce whatever
20     we have.  The problem is that you have filed multiple
21     lawsuits.  And we have -- as you do, we have multiple
22     Beacon boxes of documents; and we used our best efforts
23     to try to determine exactly what you want, and this is
24     what we brought.  
25               MS. LARKINS:  Is it not true, Mr. Shinoff, that

Page 9

1     you actually used your best efforts not to produce the
2     documents I requested?  
3               MR. SHINOFF:  That's not true
.  And I'm not
4     going to argue with you.  
5     BY MS. LARKINS:  
6
         Q.   Did you bring a bate stamped document 11 that
7     was not written by me?
8               MR. SHINOFF:  We brought a bate stamped
9     document 11.  
10               MS. LARKINS:  Was it written by me?  
11               MR. SHINOFF:  I don't know.  It has your
12     initials by it.
13               MS. LARKINS:  Does it have my name on it?  
14               MR. SHINOFF:  It has your name on it, yes.
15               MS. LARKINS:  Does it say "from Maura Larkins"?  
16               MR. SHINOFF:  It does.
17               MS. LARKINS:  But you are not sure if it
18     actually is from Maura Larkins?  
19               MR. SHINOFF:  Only you could authenticate
20     whether that document is from you, but it appears to be
21     from you.
22               MS. LARKINS:  Why would you produce a document
23     in this case that appears to be from me if you didn't
24     think it was from me?  
25               MR. SHINOFF:  Because you asked for bate stamp

Page 10

1     11, we produced bate stamp 11.  
2               MS. LARKINS:  You wouldn't by any chance be
3     trying to perpetrate a fraud on the court by producing a
4     false document that wasn't really from me, that appeared
5     to be from me?  
6               MR. SHINOFF:  I would never perpetrate a fraud
7     upon the court.  I know that you use language like that
8     without any consideration of what you are saying, but
9     bate stamp 11 is responsive to your document request, and
10     bate stamp 11 is here.  So I would suggest that you move
11     forward with your documents and stop with the casting
12     personal aspersions.  Take the deposition, please.  
13     BY MS. LARKINS:  
14          Q.   Uhm.  Mr. Shinoff -- Mr. Artiano, did you do a
15     search for the documents I asked for?
16          A.   I had a paralegal do a search for the documents
17     which you asked for.  
18          Q.   You had a paralegal do the search?
19          A.   Yes.
20               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  May I look through the
21     documents?  
22               MR. SHINOFF:  Certainly.  
23               MS. LARKINS:  I believe that the documents that
24     you have here are completely separate, a completely
25     separate group of documents from the ones I wanted.

Page 11

1               MR. SHINOFF:  Well, I think you need to be
2     clearer then in terms of what you want.
3               MS. LARKINS:  Mr. Shinoff, I faxed to Kelly
4     Angell the documents that you did produce.  Well,
5     actually, you didn't produce them, but Parham Rajcic
6     produced them from my administrative hearing so that she
7     could easily determine what were the missing documents.  
8               Your law firm has had years to produce these
9     documents; and, apparently, they must be very harmful to
10     your case or you would have produced them.
11               MR. SHINOFF:  Well, you can entertain whatever
12     fantasy you wish to engage in; and I know that you are
13     prone to fantasies, but I respectfully disagree with your
14     characterization.  

15               MS. LARKINS:  Mr. Shinoff, did you seek a

16     protective order from discovery in my case when I sued

17     Chula Vista Elementary School District?  

18               MR. SHINOFF:  My deposition isn't being taken.

19               MS. LARKINS:  Oh, that is really confusing.  

20     Uhm.  I have got to get more.  I've got to get you

21     talking more, Mr. Artiano.  I have got to remember that

22     it is not Mr. Shinoff's deposition being taken.

23     BY MS. LARKINS:

24          Q.   Did your law firm, Mr. Artiano, seek one or

25     more protective orders in -- when I -- in the case when

Page 12

1     you were defending the Chula Vista Elementary School

2     District and other associated defendants?

3          A.   I have no idea.

4          Q.   Okay.  When did you first become aware of my

5     lawsuit against Chula Vista Elementary School District?

6          A.   Probably when we discovered the defamatory

7     material that you had on your website, right about that

8     time.

9          Q.   When I sued DOES for obstruction of justice,

10     and then I sought to name your firm as a DOE, your

11     secretary talked to me quite frequently about trying to

12     serve you.  She would tell me that you weren't in.  And I

13     remember one day in particular, she said
you were in.  

14     And then she called -- no,
that you would be in at such

15     and such a time, and then half an hour before that, she

16     called and said that you had just left.  

17               Do you have any memory of my trying to serve

18     you as a DOE as the representative of Stutz, Artiano?  

19          A.   No, ma'am.  

20          Q.   Do you normally have a pretty good memory?

21          A.   I have an excellent memory.

22          Q.   You have an excellent memory.  Okay.  I need to

23     find a document.  I need to take a break.  Is that okay

24     with everybody?

25               MR. SHINOFF:  I want to stay on the record, but

Page 13

1     you can look for your document.  

2     BY MS. LARKINS:

3          Q.   Uhm.  Okay.  Fine.  Okay.  What I'm looking for

4     is the motion that your law firm filed.  What I'm looking

5     for is the motion that your law firm filed in that case

6     where I was -- I filed a complaint for obstruction of

7     justice against DOES; and your law firm got involved in

8     that.  

9          A.   Ma'am, I'm here to have my deposition taken.  

10     I'm not here to listen to you make speeches.  So please,

11     if you have questions that you would like to ask me, I

12     will be happy to answer them.

13          Q.   Okay.  Let me ask you this.  Well, I will tell

14     you what, just before we go on to the motion that Kelly

15    
 Angell filed on behalf of Chula Vista School District,

16     apparently collecting taxpayers' money for doing it, when

17     Chula Vista School District was not a party in the case.  

18          A.   Ma'am, please ask me questions.  Don't give

19     speeches.

20          Q.   Well, gee, I would have thought that you really

21     didn't like to talk, to answer questions that much, since

22     you had Mr. Shinoff doing most of your answers.  

23               Okay.  I do want to get and note your law

24     firm's involvement in the obstruction of justice case.  

25               Let's get -- let's just finish this up and find

Page 14

1     out if you produced any of the documents that were

2     requested.  Okay.  

3               MR. SHINOFF:  We produced the documents that

4     were requested.  

5               MS. LARKINS:  So far, I haven't seen a single

6     document, but let's go on to Number 2.

7               MR. SHINOFF:  There is a disconnect, obviously,

8     between what you wrote down and what you wanted to have.  

9     So I believe that we did a reasonable, good faith search

10     to determine what documents were responsive to your

11     request for production.

12               MS. LARKINS:  Did you read the last line in

13     this paragraph that is numbered one?  

14               MR. SHINOFF:  The paralegal was charged with

15     the responsibility for looking for the documents.  So she

16     looked through multiple documents, and that's what she

17     found.  

18               MS. LARKINS:  Well, perhaps it's the

19     paralegal's fault.  Perhaps she didn't read that

20     sentence.

21               MR. SHINOFF:  She's a very fine paralegal.

22               MS. LARKINS:  Well, this a very fine sentence.  

23     It is very clear.

24               THE WITNESS:  Ma'am, I'm not going to waste my

25     time here with your engaging in these types of




15





1     discussions.  Just ask questions, please.

2               MS. LARKINS:  Well, Mr. Shinoff, did you hear

3     that?  

4               MR. SHINOFF:  Yes, I did.  And there are

5     provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure that prevent

6     depositions that are vexatious, that are harassing, that

7     are argumentative.  You are held to the same standard as

8     a lawyer; and so you need to ask questions.  That is what

9     the Discovery Act in the State of California is all

10     about.  

11               You desire to engage in speeches.  That's not

12     what the discovery process is about.  So I respectfully

13     disagree with your approach.  Mr. Artiano is here to

14     answer questions.

15               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  Mr. Shinoff, you are

16     required to behave, as well as an in pro per; and that

17     means that you should not be engaging in speeches, which

18     you just did.

19               MR. SHINOFF:  Because I'm commenting on your

20     behavior, because I think it is violative of the Code of

21     Civil Procedure in the State of California.

22               MS. LARKINS:  Well, that's exactly what I think

23     of your behavior.  When you go on saying things like I

24     make statements without any consideration, which you said

25     today, or saying things like I know that you are prone to




16





1     fantasy, fantasies, I think that you are stepping outside

2     of a professional behavior, and I think that you need to

3     follow the suggestions that Mr. Artiano just made.  

4               MR. SHINOFF:  Is that a question?  

5               MS. LARKINS:  I'm not the deponent,          

6     Mr. Shinoff.

7               MR. SHINOFF:  No.  You are the person who is

8     supposed to be posing the questions.  

9               MS. LARKINS:  Thank you.  Okay.  I want to --

10     apparently, you completely avoided all of this by blaming

11     it on your paralegal.
 And you avoided Number 1,

12     producing any of those documents.  

13               Let's look at Number 2.  Okay.  Do you have

14     documents containing information regarding the dollar

15     amounts of payments from Chula Vista -- Chula Vista

16     Elementary School District?  

17               MR. SHINOFF:  No.

18               MS. LARKINS:  Oh.  Didn't you just earlier say

19     that you produced all the documents?  

20               MR. SHINOFF:  I said we produced the bate

21     stamped documents, yes.

22               MS. LARKINS:  But on Number 2, you didn't

23     produce any of those?  

24               MR. SHINOFF:  That's correct.  

25               MS. LARKINS:  May I ask why?  




17





1               MR. SHINOFF:  Well, our objection is that they

2     are proprietary in nature.

3               MS. LARKINS:  Okay.  Did you produce documents

4     supporting your claim that my website has caused

5     financial losses to your firm?  

6               MR. SHINOFF:  We don't have specific documents

7     other than your website itself, and we have documents

8     from your website.

9               MS. LARKINS:  I have no information on my

10     website about financial losses to you as a result of my

11     website.

12               MR. SHINOFF:  It is our belief that your

13     website has interfered with prospective economic

14     advantage.  It's our opinion that your website is

15     slanderous, per se.

16               MS. LARKINS:  If it were false, it would be

17     slanderous, per se.  I agree with you there.  The only

18     problem is is that it's all true.  

19               Do you consider -- do you consider yourself a

20     lawyer for a public entity when you work for Chula Vista

21     Elementary School District?  

22               MR. SHINOFF:  I think your deposition is of

23     Mr. Artiano.

24               MS. LARKINS:  Oh, that is right.  Boy.

25     BY MS. LARKINS:




18





1          Q.   Do you feel left out, Mr. Artiano?

2          A.   I just would like to get on with the deposition

3     if you intend to take my deposition.

4          Q.   Let's try.  Let's just hope that Mr. Shinoff

5     won't be talking quite so much.  

6               Okay.  Mr. Artiano, in your complaint against

7     me, you stated or your firm stated that I had cost you

8     $100,000 or more.  Do you have -- can you explain to me

9     how you came to that figure?  

10          A.   To which paragraph are you referring?  

11          Q.   I think it's right at the end of your

12     complaint.  

13          A.   Which paragraph specifically?  

14          Q.   If you let me look at that, I will find it for

15     you.  

16          A.   Well, this is my copy.

17          Q.   You don't remember putting in your complaint

18     that you had losses of $100,000 or more?

19          A.   Ma'am, I just asked you to tell me which

20     paragraph you are referring to.

21          Q.   Okay.  

22          A.   I'm happy to answer it.

23          Q.   Mr. Artiano, I believe that the quality of your

24     memory is important.  Could you tell me, do you remember

25     that, in the complaint that your law firm filed, and you




19





1     are representing that law firm, that you said that you

2     had $100,000 or more of financial damages?

3               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm going to object to the nature

4     of the question as being argumentative.  You can answer

5     if you can.  

6               THE WITNESS:  Yes.  In paragraph 35, it is

7     alleged that as a result of your defamatory statements

8     that we have suffered economic detriment and general

9     damages in an amount in excess of $100,000.

10     BY MS. LARKINS:  

11          Q.   I notice that you did have to look through that

12     complaint to find that fact.  I myself remembered it

13     without looking at the complaint.  

14          A.   I told you before.  I'm not here to listen to

15     you give speeches.  Just ask me questions.

16          Q.   Okay.  Let me just say, given what just

17     happened, Mr. Artiano, would you like to revise your

18     earlier statement that you have an excellent memory?

19               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm going to object that the

20     question is argumentative.  Don't respond to that.

21     BY MS. LARKINS:  

22          Q.   Okay.  Is there any particular client that you

23     have lost as a result of my website that you know of?

24          A.   I don't know at this time if there is any

25     particular client that we have lost as a result of your




20





1     defamatory statements.

2          Q.   Mr. Artiano, they are only defamatory if they

3     are false.  

4               MR. SHINOFF:  Again, I'm going to object that

5     the question is argumentative as phrased; and I would

6     respectfully request that you ask a question.

7     BY MS. LARKINS:  

8          Q.   Okay.  You say that you don't know at this

9     time.  Why didn't you find out if you had lost a client

10     before you filed this suit saying that you had $100,000

11     of damages?

12          A.   You want me to answer that?  

13               MR. SHINOFF:  Sure.  Go ahead.

14               THE WITNESS:  Because of the defamatory

15     statements, which you have made on your website, it has

16     come to my knowledge that there have been a number of

17     individuals who have googled the name of the website.  

18     And that, in turn, has led them to your San Diego, I'm

19     not sure what, San Diego Education Report Website.  

20  And I know that it has caused concern on the

21     part of at least one attorney.
 I'm assuming that anyone

22     who googles us, as most clients and prospective clients

23     do, they'll come across your website and know nothing at

24     all about the author of the website and whether or not

25     the statements have any truth at all.




21





1     BY MS. LARKINS:

2          Q.   If they knew more about the author of the

3     website, what would they know, that you seem to imply

4     that there is something to be known that isn't on my

5     website, I mean?

6          A.   Well, what they would know is that the

7     statements, which you have made impugning the integrity

8     and character of the firm, are false.  

9               In addition, I also know that, at least, at the

10     very least, one new attorney in our firm googled our

11     website prior to making a decision as to whether or not

12     he was going to join the firm, and then had to -- had to

13     check around after he saw the materials on your website

14     to determine who this person was and why these things

15     were being said so that he could determine whether or not

16     he should join our firm.  

17               I assume that there are a number of prospective

18     candidates, as well as clients that we have, that do

19     exactly the same thing, come across the same information,

20     and it causes them concern.

21          Q.   Okay.  Well, it seems to me that you have done

22     a pretty good argument for saying that my website has not

23     harmed your firm.  The only evidence you have is that

24     someone read my website and then came to your firm.  

25               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm going to object that the




22





1     question is -- the statement is argumentative.  If you

2     could ask your next question, please.

3     BY MS. LARKINS:  

4          Q.   Okay.  Is it your wish that people not check

5     around before they join your firm?

6          A.   Is it my wish?  

7          Q.   Uh-huh.  You seem to be complaining that this

8     prospective new attorney had to check around about you,

9     your firm, before he decided to join your firm.  Is it

10     your wish that prospective attorneys not check around?

11          A.   No.  I think that anyone proposing any type of

12     relationship with a firm, whether it is a candidate or a

13     prospective client, do their due diligence.  What

14     concerns me is that people have to deal with false

15     statements, which were made on your website.

16          Q.   Well, I'd like to point out to you,

17     Mr. Artiano --

18          A.   Don't point anything out to me, ma'am.  Just

19     ask questions.  

20          Q.   Okay.  Has any court of law decided that these

21     statements were false, the statements on my website were

22     false?

23          A.   Has any court of law?  

24          Q.   Uh-huh.  

25          A.   This lawsuit was just filed.




23





1          Q.   Uhm.  

2          A.   There will be -- there will be a determination

3     at the conclusion of this case that the statements on

4     your website were false.

5          Q.   Is that your hope?

6          A.   No.  I know that to be the case.

7          Q.   How do you know that?  

8          A.   Because I know that the statements, which you

9     have made, are false.

10          Q.   Uhm.  Okay.  Let's get back.  Uhm.  

11               Mr. Artiano, do you think that someone in your

12     law firm may have destroyed evidence in my lawsuit

13     against Chula Vista Elementary School District?  

14          A.   I'm certain that no one in my law firm

15     destroyed any evidence.

16          Q.   Do you think that someone may have hidden some

17     evidence?

18          A.   I'm certain that no one has hidden evidence.

19          Q.   Do you think that someone may have misplaced

20     it?  

21          A.   I have absolutely no idea as to whether or not

22     anyone misplaced documents.

23          Q.   Well, wouldn't that be your best explanation

24     for why you don't have Document 05 to produce to me

25     today?




24





1               MR. SHINOFF:  We did produce Document 05.  

2     BY MS. LARKINS:

3          Q.   I mean Document 5 without the zero.
 Isn't that

4     the best explanation for why you don't have Documents 5,

5     6 and 9 to produce to me today?

6          A.   No.  The best explanation is that your request

7     is extremely vague; and the paralegal did her best job in

8     trying to decipher what it was that you wanted.

9          Q.   Uhm.  Poor dear.  Uhm.  I -- maybe someone

10     should have helped her out.  

11               Mr. Artiano, would you, yourself, give it a

12     try, to try to find these documents here, 5, 6, 9.  And

13     then these other ones, apparently, they have the same

14     numbers as the ones that you have produced, but they are

15     from a different set.

16               MR. SHINOFF:  Well, if you could be clearer in

17     terms of the documents that you are requesting, since

18     there are multiple lawsuits that you were involved in, we

19     would be happy to provide it in response to request for

20     production of documents.

21               MS. LARKINS:  Is that your answer, too?  

22               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm responding to that question

23     as counsel for Mr. Artiano, because that is not an

24     appropriate question in a deposition.
 The question is

25     whether we will produce documents responsive to a request




25





1     for production.  We will of course produce documents

2     responsive to a request for production of documents.

3     BY MS. LARKINS:

4          Q.   Okay.  Mr. Artiano, are you in agreement that

5     you did not bring today documents that were bate stamped

6     with a simple 5 without a zero in front of it?

7               MR. SHINOFF:  The document speaks for itself.  

8     I'm going to object.  I'm going to instruct the witness

9     not to respond.  

10     BY MS. LARKINS:  

11          Q.   If my statements about your law firm are false,

12     then why are you so afraid of discovery?

13               MR. SHINOFF:  Again, the objection is that the

14     question is argumentative; and it is vexatious in nature.  

15     And I'm going to instruct him not to respond.

16     BY MS. LARKINS:  

17          Q.   Okay.  Uhm.  Mr. Artiano, when I asked you,

18     uhm, what should people who come to my website know about

19     me that they don't know from the website, you said that

20     the statements are false; that's what they should know.  

21     But that is not something about me.  What should they

22     know about me that is not on the website?

23          A.   I don't know what they could possibly learn

24     about you through the website.

25          Q.   How many -- approximately how many pages of the




26


1     website have you read, Mr. Artiano?

2          A.   I have no idea.  I don't think that the website

3     is actually paginated.

4          Q.   No.  But just in your head, you could count,

5     like you would know if you had read one page or a hundred

6     pages.  

7          A.   I know that I have looked at the pages that we

8     have produced today.

9          Q.   Okay.  Do you know that, on the website, I talk

10     about -- I tell the
story of how I was arrested?  

11          A.   (Witness shook head from side to side.)

12          Q.   You didn't know that?

13          A.   I have no idea whether or not you have been

14     arrested.   
It wouldn't surprise me, but I have no
idea.

15          Q.   What would you expect me to be
arrested for,

16     Mr. Artiano?

17          A.   I have --

18               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm going to object that the

19     question calls for speculation.  I'm going to instruct

20     him not to answer.

21     BY MS. LARKINS:

22          Q.   Well, you said it wouldn't surprise you.  You

23     said it wouldn't surprise you that I had been arrested.  

24     So I was just wondering what sort of arrest you were

25     expecting to have occurred?

27


1               MR. SHINOFF:  Go ahead.  You can answer that.

2               THE WITNESS:  I have no idea.

3     BY MS. LARKINS:  

4          Q.   But you just kind of, perhaps you'd like the

5     idea of me being arrested, and maybe you just created a

6     fantasy about it?

7               MR. SHINOFF:  I'm going to object that the

8     question is argumentative.  Don't respond to that,

9     please.

10     BY MS. LARKINS:  

11          Q.   Okay.  Uhm.  
Did you know that, on my website,

12     I have a detailed explanation of my
administrative

13     hearing?

14          A.   Do I know?  

15          Q.   Yes.  

16          A.   I seem to recall that there was some

17     information concerning an administrative hearing.

18          Q.   Okay.  Do you know that, on my website, there

19     is -- I have written a lot about the school I taught at?

20          A.   I don't really recall that.  What I was looking

21     at were statements concerning my law firm.

22          Q.   Uhm.  

23          A.   Whatever else you may have written about was of

24     no concern to me.  

25          Q.   Well, you seem to have expressed today a

28

1     concern that people know more about me than what is on my

2     website.  

3               MR. SHINOFF:  That's not a question.  

4               MS. LARKINS:  But we can talk about that in

5     another forum.  

6               MR. SHINOFF:  Is that a threat or is that a

7     question?  

8               MS. LARKINS:  You guys filed this lawsuit, not

9     me.  We don't have to talk about everything in the

10     deposition.  We can talk about it at trial, in motions,

11     in hearings, all kinds of other places.  We don't have to

12     talk about it now.  

13     BY MS. LARKINS:

14          Q.   Okay.  You said that you thought that people

15     should do due diligence when they -- let me see.  

16               You seem to be upset that the prospective

17     lawyer had to check around after seeing my website.  Am I

18     correct in that perception, that you were upset that he

19     had to check around?  

20          A.   As you have stated it, you are incorrect, yes.

21          Q.   Could you explain to me exactly how you feel

22     about the lawyers, the prospective lawyers having to

23     check around?

24          A.   What I had said was that it's very unfortunate

25     that someone would have to investigate statements,
which


29


1     you have made on your website, which are false,

2     concerning unethical behavior, comments impugning the

3     reputation and character of the law firm and individual

4     lawyers in the law firm.

5          Q.   Okay.  About how much of your law firm's work

6     is work for public entities?  

7          A.   Uhm.  I'm not sure that it has ever been broken

8     down in percentages.  My best estimate would probably be

9     about 40 percent.

10          Q.   Okay.  How much of Mr. Shinoff's work is for

11     public entities?

12          A.   I don't know.

13          Q.   All right.  When Mr. Shinoff is working for a

14     public entity, do you believe that his actions become a

15     matter of public interest?

16          A.   If you are asking whether I think Mr. Shinoff

17     is a public figure, my answer is no.  

18          Q.   Does Mr. Shinoff frequently speak to the press?

19          A.   You'd have to ask Mr. Shinoff that.  I

20     certainly know that he has spoken to the press, but you

21     can certainly ask.  You certainly have to ask him how

22     frequently.

23          Q.   Mr. Artiano, you seem to be very certain that

24     he's not a public figure; and, yet, you are not certain

25     whether he frequently speaks to the press.  

30

1          A.   Is that a question, ma'am?  

2          Q.   Well, I guess I'm just talking to myself here,

3     really.  I shouldn't be just mentioning that.  Uhm.  

4     Okay.  I'm just trying to understand your position here.  

5               Let me put it this way:  Does Mr. -- is      

6     Mr. --  

7               Do you read the newspaper?  

8          A.   I read many newspapers.

9          Q.   Do you read the North County Times?

10          A.   That's not one of the newspapers that I read.

11          Q.   How about the San Diego Union?

12          A.   I read the San Diego Union.

13          Q.   Okay.  Has anybody ever talked to you about

14     articles about Mr. Shinoff and other lawyers in your firm

15     that have been running in the North County Times over the

16     last, well, years, many years?

17          A.   Probably not about the articles themselves;

18     although, there may have been discussions about cases,

19     which were prompted by articles.

20          Q.   Or articles that were prompted by cases?  

21          A.   I'm sorry?  

22          Q.   Or do you really mean articles that were

23     prompted by cases?

24          A.   No, discussions of cases or inquiries about

25     cases, which were prompted by individuals reading the
                     

        31

1     articles.

2          Q.   A case would be prompted by -- oh, you mean a

3     discussion was prompted by someone reading the article?

4          A.   Yes.
Main page
Stutz v. Larkins
defamation suit
Part 2: Artiano deposition pg 30-39
Part 3: Artiano deposition pg 40-58
San Diego Education
Report Blog
SITE MAP
HOME
Why This Website

Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz v. Maura
Larkins defamation

SDCOE

CVESD

Castle Park
Elementary School

Law Enforcement

CTA

CVE

Stutz Artiano Shinoff
& Holtz

Silence is Golden

Schools and Violence

Office Admin Hearings

Larkins OAH Hearing
San Diego Education Report
SDER
San Diego
Education Report
SDER
SDER
SDER
Deposition continued HERE.
Artiano cases
More documents in this
case that have
disappeared mysteriously:
hacker hits.