Taylor sues Cox

From the AJC:

Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor’s campaign filed suit Monday in Fulton County Superior Court against his Democratic gubernatorial opponent, Secretary of State Cathy Cox, saying she is violating the state’s Open Records Act.

Taylor’s campaign filed an Open Records request in April asking for documents dealing with her use of Investor Trust Fund money to run TV and radio commercials warning against securities fraud.

Cox’s critics have accused her of spending $4 million in trust fund money to bolster her gubernatorial bid. Cox said the ads were designated to warn Georgians about securities fraud. The ads were funded with money from a national lawsuit against investment firms that states received for investor education. The secretary of state’s office turned over thousands of documents, but Taylor’s campaign said Monday that it failed to turn over copies of the TV and radio ads.

Peter Jackson, spokesman for the Cox campaign, said copies of those ads are awaiting the Taylor campaign at the secretary of state’s office


  1. Mike Hassinger says:

    Taylor campaign makes its first mistake. Instead of Cathy’s recent, weak ads, we’ll get to see all those effective ads she did for “free” back in 2005 as they are replayed on the local news. A lawsuit is pretty extreme when they’ve given you “thousands of documents.” And didn’t anybody, you know, call and ask? “Hey, how about those TV and radio ads?” Nope. They ran to the Courthouse, hoping for a knockout. Stupid.

  2. truerblue says:

    I really don’t know what he expects to get from this. I have always been told that one must “prove damages” in a lawsuit. Who has been damaged from these ads? Certainly not the elderly-who benefited greatly from these ads. Does Mark Taylor have any idea the number of people affected by investor fraud in the state of Georgia? These ads were clear, concise and educational.

  3. RiverRat says:

    Ha! So a lot of people saw a well produced ad?? That doesn’t make it ethical! She used funds intended for investor education to promote her candidacy for governor, and it makes her the kind of selfish, sleazy politician she claims she isn’t.

    Mike, I think you are missing the fact that as long as this lawsuit is around, Cox has to answer questions about why she misused public funds to promote her campaign.

    Cox’s biggest problem in this whole race is that she is trying to be something she is not, and all Taylor is doing is catching her at it. Cox is the epitome of an insider.

  4. truerblue says:

    RiverRat-Is your brain “waterlogged”? What is wrong with this type of education? Do you actually think that Georgia can rope a bunch of seniors and pull them into a classroom and educate them on investor scams? How about going door to door? Oooh-that makes alot of sense. The ads got a message out–“if you have questions with this call our office and we’ll help protect you from scam artists!” As long as I’ve been reading your blogs you never post anything of any substance or with any explanation that might suport your claims. You just continue to babble.

  5. bird says:

    Truerblue–I haven’t read the lawsuit, but I would be almost certain that Taylor is not seeking monetary damages. He would be seeking injunctive relief, i.e., the release of the documents. So he doesn’t need to prove damages, just the right to receive the documents, which his campaign claims the Open Records Act entitles him. There may be monetary penalties in the act, I don’t know, but it would be a terrible PR move for Taylor’s campaign to try to finacially profit from this dispute, so I doubt that is at issue here.

  6. schleyguy says:

    Cox could have appeared in the ads with other notable Georgians, or had famous celebrities deliver the message without her. I honestly don’t know how much traction the Taylor campaign can gain out of this, but an honest reading of the situation leaves you with only one conclusion and that is the ads benefited Cox personally.

    Be interested to see what kind of ads other states ran with their money from the trust fund.

Comments are closed.