Anonymous wrote:Anyone willing to share the retainer for this firm? Curious how much money is already in ashes.
Anonymous wrote:Anyone willing to share the retainer for this firm? Curious how much money is already in ashes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We should let this thread die its rightful death.
It's kind of fun to watch the Wootton folks spiral. Their lawyers must be telling them they don't have a case. I'm sure they'll be happy to take their money, though.
Lol it’s kind of fun reading all of this knowing yall have zero idea of what’s actually going on.
We sure are going to have fun seeing MCPS in court!
“Lol” you keep saying this and yet nothing 🤔
Yeah wasn’t the “avalanche” supposed to have come down already?
I have been active on this thread, generally in support of the adopted proposal and opposing the filing of any lawsuit.
That being said, I'm also a lawyer and this view is flawed. They retained the firm under two weeks ago. That firm needs time to review materials, get up to speed on procedure and precedent, and draft a filing. This is all normal. I'd give it two more weeks before gloating that the lawsuit hasn't appeared.
(And don't get me started on the posters pestering to file before a decision was even made.)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We should let this thread die its rightful death.
It's kind of fun to watch the Wootton folks spiral. Their lawyers must be telling them they don't have a case. I'm sure they'll be happy to take their money, though.
Lol it’s kind of fun reading all of this knowing yall have zero idea of what’s actually going on.
We sure are going to have fun seeing MCPS in court!
“Lol” you keep saying this and yet nothing 🤔
Yeah wasn’t the “avalanche” supposed to have come down already?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We should let this thread die its rightful death.
It's kind of fun to watch the Wootton folks spiral. Their lawyers must be telling them they don't have a case. I'm sure they'll be happy to take their money, though.
Lol it’s kind of fun reading all of this knowing yall have zero idea of what’s actually going on.
We sure are going to have fun seeing MCPS in court!
“Lol” you keep saying this and yet nothing 🤔
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We should let this thread die its rightful death.
It's kind of fun to watch the Wootton folks spiral. Their lawyers must be telling them they don't have a case. I'm sure they'll be happy to take their money, though.
Lol it’s kind of fun reading all of this knowing yall have zero idea of what’s actually going on.
We sure are going to have fun seeing MCPS in court!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As someone who read too much Policy FAA and COMAR, I'll be interested to see what they come up with.
It's a heavy lift, given that COMAR gives great leeway to the local board.
From a previous appeal: "This appeal involves a redistricting decision of a local board of education. Decisions of a local board involving a local policy or controversy or dispute regarding the rules and regulations of the local board shall be considered prima facie correct. The State Board may not substitute its judgement for that of the local board unless the decision is arbitrary, unreasonable, or illegal" (COMAR 13.A.01.05.05A)
https://marylandpublicschools.org/Documents/ARCHIVE/opinions/2003-2009/Opinion0638.pdf
A standard they cannot meet.
- Signed,
An education lawyer
Just because you don't like the decision does not make it arbitrary, unreasonable, or illegal. Wootton parents need to stop. The total waste of resources.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As someone who read too much Policy FAA and COMAR, I'll be interested to see what they come up with.
It's a heavy lift, given that COMAR gives great leeway to the local board.
From a previous appeal: "This appeal involves a redistricting decision of a local board of education. Decisions of a local board involving a local policy or controversy or dispute regarding the rules and regulations of the local board shall be considered prima facie correct. The State Board may not substitute its judgement for that of the local board unless the decision is arbitrary, unreasonable, or illegal" (COMAR 13.A.01.05.05A)
https://marylandpublicschools.org/Documents/ARCHIVE/opinions/2003-2009/Opinion0638.pdf
A standard they cannot meet.
- Signed,
An education lawyer
Just because you don't like the decision does not make it arbitrary, unreasonable, or illegal. Wootton parents need to stop. The total waste of resources.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As someone who read too much Policy FAA and COMAR, I'll be interested to see what they come up with.
It's a heavy lift, given that COMAR gives great leeway to the local board.
From a previous appeal: "This appeal involves a redistricting decision of a local board of education. Decisions of a local board involving a local policy or controversy or dispute regarding the rules and regulations of the local board shall be considered prima facie correct. The State Board may not substitute its judgement for that of the local board unless the decision is arbitrary, unreasonable, or illegal" (COMAR 13.A.01.05.05A)
https://marylandpublicschools.org/Documents/ARCHIVE/opinions/2003-2009/Opinion0638.pdf
A standard they cannot meet.
- Signed,
An education lawyer
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We should let this thread die its rightful death.
It's kind of fun to watch the Wootton folks spiral. Their lawyers must be telling them they don't have a case. I'm sure they'll be happy to take their money, though.