Replies

"A mother named Violet with a 16-year-old boy who has autism begged the schools to let her son have an exemption.
They refused. When forced to wear the masks he became distraught and he harmed himself so badly that he had to be hospitalized in a mental institution.
Violet obtained the bond for the superintendent of her school district. Turns out – The superintendent was carrying a $4 million liability per bond claim!!
So next Violet served the superintendent with a letter of intent to file a claim against her bond if she didn’t pull back the mask mandates, admit she was wrong, and resign within five days. The superintendent did nothing.
After day 6 Violet filed the claim against her at the bond company.
The very next day we have a recording from the lawyers who represent the district explaining that they have to get rid of the masks, all state and federal funding is BLOCKED, and the superintendent is on her own with regard to the $4 million claim!!!
They also put out a request for parent volunteers to substitute for teachers because their funding is CEASED due to an OPEN claim against them."

Here's the very short article text, and it seems fishy to me. I was a California civil litigator for forty years. A bond claim is not a tort claim. I suspect whoever wrote the story is both not a lawyer and way embellished the facts.
"A mother named Violet with a 16-year-old boy who has autism begged the schools to let her son have an exemption.
They refused. When forced to wear the masks he became distraught and he harmed himself so badly that he had to be hospitalized in a mental institution.
Violet obtained the bond for the superintendent of her school district. Turns out – The superintendent was carrying a $4 million liability per bond claim!!
So next Violet served the superintendent with a letter of intent to file a claim against her bond if she didn’t pull back the mask mandates, admit she was wrong, and resign within five days. The superintendent did nothing.
After day 6 Violet filed the claim against her at the bond company.
The very next day we have a recording from the lawyers who represent the district explaining that they have to get rid of the masks, all state and federal funding is BLOCKED, and the superintendent is on her own with regard to the $4 million claim!!!

They also put out a request for parent volunteers to substitute for teachers because their funding is CEASED due to an OPEN claim against them."

I understood it as their was a voice mail with all the statements above, more of a threat, which led the school district to rescind the mask mandate and replace it with a recommendation. Even if that is all that happened, the change from mandate to recommendation is a good outcome, especially for the mother involved.