Prevail, when you first brought this nonsense up almost two weeks ago, here's a part of what I posted on Dec. 12 regarding Cunningham asking for his name to be put on that lawsuit instead of Preston's:
I think there are two clear purposes for Michael Cunningham to request that his name be put on that lawsuit, and neither one of them has to do with "opening the books." ...The first purpose for replacing "Joey R. Preston" with "Michael Cunningham" in that lawsuit is that, as the new administrator, it is now his job to protect county staff from intimidation by Council. Civil servants should never have to fear for their jobs because of a change in leadership, but all this bragging about putting people on leave and getting rid of people has instilled that fear in many of them ...
Second, Preston's lawsuit against C.Wilson and Waldrep technically became moot once Preston agreed to the buyout with the "hold blameless" clause, but he can't just ask that it be dropped. That takes a court order, which means a hearing. Cunningham can serve as the surrogate for that hearing, which will a) allow the lawsuit to be dismissed, and b) clear up the lines of responsibility for legal fees that have already been accrued in filing and defending this case.
You delight in assigning sinister motives to anything Preston did, and now you're taking the same approach against Cunningham. Your leaps of logic are wearing thin, even for some of us who actually supported the efforts to get Preston to move on to new endeavors.
Give Cunningham a chance. Right now, you're trying to demonize him without a shred of evidence that he will be Joey Preston II, and that's just wrong. It isn't necessary to destroy anybody to change the direction of Anderson County, and attempting to do so is petty, ruthless and misguided. If it continues, I strongly suspect the next loud noise you hear coming from the Administrative offices will be the sound of Cindy and Bob Waldrep shooting themselves in the foot ... again.
-jdtippett
So, now you're telling us Cunningham may be prepared to petition the court to dismiss that lawsuit? Notice the paragraph in boldfaced type above. As Gomer Pyle used to say, "Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! Gollllllleeeeee!"
You do know, of course, that if the court dismisses the lawsuit "without prejudice" Cunningham can re-activate quickly if County Council tries to step on 4-9-660, don't you? There's no "turmoil" here - just sound strategy to protect civil servants (hired help, as opposed to contractual employees) from the pit bulls of local politics. 
Prevail, my friend, I'm not worried about your crystal ball being clouded by smoke. I'm more concerned about the smoke you're blowing in your never-ending efforts to confuse people about what's going on and to demonize Michael Cunningham. Do you have any real news, or just more spin?
Check. Your move. 
