Esquire Jones, having been hired by Ms. Hurley to defend her actions of moving out of her elected district, had filed a couple of motions. Since there's no way to defend Hurley's actions, his strategy was to try to have the case thrown out on what he claimed to be technical problems with the district attorney's case.

The judge ruled against Esquire Jones' motion to dismiss. Next was Esquire Jones' motion to remove District Attorney from the case. Judge ruled against that motion also.

So now the case is headed to court on the actual merits of the case, the fact that Ms. Hurley moved out of her elected district more than a year ago but continues to serve in her elected position and worse, continues to draw her tax payer funded stipend and benefits of more than 20k per year.

The earliest the case could be heard, would be the December session of chancery court, and that's not a certainty.

I'm sure Ms. Hurley will continue to happily take the tax payer's money right up to the day the judge removes her. Hopefully, if the judge does remove her, she'll have to pay back all the tax payer money she has taken since she vacated her seat.

Begs the question, according to Ms. Hurley, she's this mega, successful real estate mogul which would indicate she's making lots of money, she obviously doesn't care anything about being on the commission, she misses more than half the meetings, so why is she fighting to keep the seat? Title, status, prestige, money, insurance, no idea, but maybe by the end of the year, she'll be gone and the good residents of the 2nd district can have a representative that actually lives in their district and represents them on county commission.

Esquire Jones in his P2W mask like he wore in Court Thursday. P2W-Play To Win. Guess the mask didn't help.