First Interim Administrator - Disposition?
Well, speaking of transparency.... I just heard that the former administrator, who was in office after the Nov. 18 event, has made an agreement with the county regarding the lawsuit and that as part of the agreement, he will be cooperating fully with the ongoing investigation .
That is kind of open-ended... anyone have any more information to confirm, refute, or elaborate?
-the-queen
Additional information . . .
County dropped the counterclaims WITH PREJUDICE.
Translation: The county either had no evidence to support their claims (thats a given) or they are not ready to "let loose" with what they have. I'm going to err on the side of NO EVIDENCE. Either way, the counterclaims are GONE.
- SSHM
Wonderful! So would that pave the way for this case to fast-track towards resolution, or is Moore going to play coy and try to make some hay out of it?
My guess is that CC saw the clear possibility of their case costing treble-damages PLUS, and all legal costs on both sides, plus additional embarrassment to CC for the faux paus. I forsee an out of court settlement....sealed of course!
Correction ... as information is still coming in about this:
Cunningham, Michael
Stipulation Of Dismissal WITH PREJUDICE AS TO "FIRST COUNT
Filing: 06/29/2009
Anderson County
Service/Certificate Of Service by Mail
Filing: 06/29/2009
... more to come ...
- SSHM
Some please explain the following ACTIONS:
| Name | Description | Action Type | Begin Date | Completion Date |
| Cunningham, Michael | Stipulation Of Dismissal WITH PREJUDICE AS TO "FIRST COUNT- | Filing | 06/29/2009 |
| Anderson County | Service/Certificate Of Service by Mail | Filing | 06/29/2009 |
| Cunningham, Michael | CP Master Jury Docket | Event | 01/01/2010 |
If I am reading this correctly: Plaintiff MC filed to dismiss. Defendent AC sent a letter. Does "CP Master Jury Docket" mean that this has been placed on the Court Docket for a jury trial, starting 01/01/2009?
How do you read into this that the counterclaim was dropped by AC?
JK
CV,
You missed the part where I said "CORRECTION" in the post before yours.
In addition, go back and look at WHAT the dismissal with prejudice entails, specifically, that first count. If I'm reading the counterclaim correctly, that destroys the conspiracy charge - ie, the County no longer contents there is a conspiracy . . .
. . . rut-ro . . .
I thought there was a mass conspiracy?!?! Guess not . . .
- SSHM
CV,
. . . rut-ro . . .
I thought there was a mass conspiracy?!?! Guess not . . .
- SSHM-sshm
I'm holding out for the paperback version of Conspiracy theory 101. Maybe it has some juicy details the not-the-SLED guys found when measuring the fences at ASEC.
all this lawyer-speak is confusing. How do you get that the county dismissed the counterclaim with prejudice if it's next to MC's name?
How do you read into this that the counterclaim was dropped by AC?JK
-centrist-view
Anderson County didn't drop the counter claim. If you look at the chain of events on the the Clerk of Court's website you will find that the only filings were Michael Cunningham's answer to the counter claim. That being the case the only way this counter-claim could be dropped with prejudice is if in his answer he asked for it and was granted this dismissal.
Anderson County is now barred from refiling a claim of civil conspiracy. With this having been dismissed with prejudice it indicates that the judge felt that this counter-claim of civil conspiracy was or borders on being a frivolous law suit.
Oh my oh my, how the tale is turning...of course the cindi clones and driver-ites will probably say that the judge is still in preston's pocket...
you know that they have never ever been able to admit error or wrongdoing. So it was all a bunch of lies?
Not like they arent familiar with the idea of lying, given the propensity that cindi has of lying..and lets not forget the "steamy paperback novel" we were promised 30 days ago by the chairman...
