COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.

: 13-CIEDWARD MARKSBERRY, Democratic Candidate for the United States Senate vs. DANIEL LOGSDON, In his personal Capacity and as Chairman of Kentucky Democratic Party PLAINTIFF

DEFENDANT

COMPLAINT AND SUIT FOR INJUNCTION COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Edward Marksberry, by counsel, and for his Complaint for damages against the above named Defendant, states as follows: I. JURISDICTIONAL ALLEGATION 1. At all times material hereto Plaintiff was a resident and citizen of the

Commonwealth of Kentucky, residing in Daviess County, Kentucky, as well as a declared candidate to be Kentucky!s Democratic Party nominee for the United States Senate. 2. At all times material hereto the Defendant, Daniel Logsdon, was Chairman of the

Kentucky Democratic Party and its agent. The Kentucky Democratic Party is located in Franklin County, Kentucky at 190 Democratic Drive, Frankfort, KY 40601. 3. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court in that the claims for relief exceed the

minimum jurisdiction of this Court. 4. Venue is proper in this Court in that the Defendant, Daniel Logsdon, is a resident

and citizen of Franklin County, Kentucky and because the alleged acts in question, which are

Page 1 of 4

described below, substantially occurred through the efforts of the Kentucky Democratic Party headquarters located in Franklin County, Kentucky. II. ALLEGED FACTS 5. In the weeks preceding July 1, 2013, Plaintiff and candidate for the United States

Senate, Edward Marksberry requested that the Kentucky Democratic Party forward various announcements about his campaign events and campaign media productions through the Kentucky Democratic Party electronic mailing network. Shortly thereafter, candidate Edward Marksberry was informed that sending out such communications would be in violation of the Kentucky Democratic Party!s By-Laws which prohibit the Kentucky Democratic Party from using its assets to endorse or support one Democratic candidate over another Democratic candidate in a Democratic primary election. 6. Candidate Edward Marksberry reviewed the By-Laws and found that Article I(d)

does indeed include such a prohibition, (See Attachment A), which is incorporated herein by reference. 7. Given the position taken by the Kentucky Democratic Party by and through

Defendant Daniel Logsdon, and given the clear and unambiguous language of the Kentucky Democratic Party!s By-Laws as described above, it came as somewhat of a surprise, and indeed a shock, when the Kentucky Democratic Party released an announcement on behalf of Democratic Party candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes, and even use it as a mechanism of raising political funds. (See Attachment B, July 1, 2013 e-mail from Kentucky Democratic Party). 8. The above e-mail from the Kentucky Democratic Party is a clear and

unambiguous violation of its own stated verbal understanding of the rules upon which it would govern itself but is also in violation of the clear and unambiguous language of its By-Laws.

Page 2 of 4

Clearly, resources of Kentucky Democratic Party were utilized to promote Alison Lundergan Grimes! campaign and denied to supporting the candidacy of Edward Marksberry. III. ALLEGED THEORIES OF LEGAL LIABILITY 9. At all times material hereto Plaintiff and candidate for the United States Senate,

Edward Marksberry was a member of the Kentucky Democratic Party. 10. The By-Laws of the Kentucky Democratic Party is an agreement between the

party and its members as to how they will conduct themselves. 11. As a candidate for the United States Senate within the Kentucky Democratic

Party, Plaintiff and candidate for the United States Senate, Edward Marksberry, is a specific and intended beneficiary of that portion of the By-Laws discussed above and which prohibits the Kentucky Democratic Party or its leaders from directly supporting one Democratic Party over another in a Democratic Primary. 12. As a result of the above, the Defendant, who is sued in his individual capacity

and as an agent for the Kentucky Democratic Party, Daniel Logsdon, has breeched his fiduciary duty and responsibility to all democrats similarly situated and specifically including Plaintiff and candidate of the United States Senate, Edward Marksberry. 13. Further, the Defendant, who is sued in his individual and representative capacity,

Daniel Logsdon, had breached the agreement and contract between the Kentucky Democratic Party and persons situated within the democratic party, such as candidate for the United States Senate, Edward Marksberry.

Page 3 of 4

IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 14. As a direct and proximate result of the actions described above, Daniel Logsdon

has caused Plaintiff and candidate for the United States Senate, Edward Marksberry to be damaged in an amount in excess of the minimum jurisdiction of this Court. 15. As a further direct and consequence of the actions alleged above, the Defendant!s

conduct is irreparably and unfairly damaged to candidacy of Edward Marksberry for the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate election. 16. Plaintiff and candidate for the United States Senate, Edward Marksberry requests

that Daniel Logsdon and the Kentucky Democratic Party be prohibited from further violations of their own By-Laws regarding favoring one democratic candidate over another in the Democratic Party primary. 17. 18. Plaintiff moves for leave to amend as necessary; Plaintiff moves for any further and just relief to which he may appear entitled.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Edward Marksberry, Democratic Candidate for the United States Senate, moves this Honorable Court to GRANT the above requested relief, and for any other further and just relief to which he may appear entitled. This the day of July, 2013. Respectfully Submitted,

Evan Taylor 2207 Frederica Street Owensboro, KY 42301 (270) 683-3533 Counsel for Plaintiff

Page 4 of 4

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful