Elliott, who is seeking a second term, sued Briggs over his use of “taxpayer advocate” in his ballot designation, while Briggs sued Elliott over listing the San Diego Union-Tribune as endorsing her in a ballot statement of qualifications.
The newspaper endorsed Elliott in the March primary, but has not made an endorsement in the general election. In her lawsuit, Elliott argued that Briggs is an attorney in private practice and therefore not a taxpayer advocate.
A Superior Court judge sided with Briggs in deciding the ballot designation lawsuit, white the other suit was settled after the Elliott campaign acknowledged the error.
“These cases are the latest example of Mara Elliott’s lack of skill and poor judgment as a lawyer,” said Briggs in a statement. “The only good news is that she wasted her own money on legal fees this time, instead of wasting taxpayer money as she has on countless other occasions.”
A spokesman for Elliott’s re-election campaign, Dan Rottenstreich, said the campaign was “happy to clarify the ballot statement” and hopes to earn the Union-Tribune’s endorsement in the general election.