NEWPORT-One year and 26 days after reaching a settlement of a complaint before the Tennessee Court of the Judiciary, Cocke County General Sessions Judge John A. Bell is the focus of a second complaint, this time alleging ethical and legal violations in connection with his handling of a civil case.

In a three-count notice of "formal charges" filed with the court of the judiciary on October 13, Disciplinary Counsel Joseph S. Daniel alleges "multiple violations of law, Tennessee statutes, and the code of judicial conduct" against Judge Bell. Daniel's complaint was filed "following a full investigation" by a three-judge investigative panel which instructed Daniel to file the formal complaint in Nashville.

The three judges who investigated the case are Christy R. Little, David M. Cook, and Kathy McMahan. The panel claims that Judge Bell "has committed and continues to commit judicial offenses" which are detailed in the panel's notice of formal charges.

Judge Bell settled a similar complaint before the court of the judiciary just before the case went to trial in Cocke County on September 23, 2008. That complaint concerned questions about the way misdemeanor probation cases were handled in Judge Bell's court.

The complaint filed by Daniel this month focuses on the way a civil court complaint involving an automobile accident was handled by Judge Bell. Another difference is that the most recent complaint contains allegations of violations of the law.

According to the 11-page complaint filed by Daniel before the court of the judiciary in Nashville, the allegations against Judge Bell include "obstruction of justice and governmental administration," "obstruction or interference with evidence or witnesses and witness tampering," and "coercion and bribery of a witness" in the civil case.

"The conduct moreover evidences a clear effort to engage in a conspiracy to subvert justice and the operation of the statutory court of the judiciary as well as the just and proper administration of the judicial system," Daniel alleges in the  complaint.

 

Civil Case Is

Focus Of Complaint

According to Daniel's complaint, the case began on August 9, 2007, when David J. Pleau, of Scotch Pine Way, Bybee, filed a civil case in Cocke County General Sessions Court against Merastar Insurance Company. Merastar was Pleau's insurance carrier which issued the uninsured motorist coverage on Pleau's vehicle.

The vehicle had reportedly been involved in a collision with another vehicle driven by Jo Ann Coleman apparently on December 29, 2006, although the civil complaint also lists the date of the accident as December 29, 2007.

Judge Bell heard the case on September 18, 2007, taking the case under advisement and announcing that he would make his decision within a week. The decisive issue in the case was a Tennessee law which requires that lawsuits in such cases first be filed against the uninsured motorist rather than against an insurance carrier.

The attorney who represented the insurance company asked the court to dismiss the complaint because Pleau was suing his own insurance carrier rather than first filing a complaint against the driver of the other vehicle involved in the mishap.

Although Judge Bell announced in court that he would render his decision in one week, "no such decision was made," Daniel's complaint alleges. "Subsequent to that 'one week,' Mr. Pleau on more than one occasion asked Judge Bell directly to rule upon the case and was assured by Judge Bell that the decision would be immediately forthcoming."

Instead, on June 27, 2008, about "nine months after the presentation of the proof and the clear mandate of the law requiring a dismissal of the complaint," Judge Bell entered a judgment in favor of the insurance company.

But none of the parties involved in the case received a copy of Judge Bell's decision until after all time for filing an appeal of the decision had expired, according to Daniel's complaint.

In his judgment against Pleau, Judge Bell "makes findings of facts as to the cause of the underlying automobile collision and the related damages," according to the complaint. "These findings demonstrate Judge John A. Bell's opinion as to the responsibility for or the cause of the accident as well as the amount of damages and ascribed the negligent conduct to the driver of the 'other vehicle.'"

Judge Bell's decisions in the case are alleged to be in violation of canons of judicial ethics which require judges to dispose of all cases promptly, efficiently, and fairly; to "respect and comply with the law and act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary;" and not to be "swayed by partisan interest, public clamor, or fear of criticism."

 

Pleau Files Complaint

After Judge Bell's decision in the civil lawsuit, Pleau filed a complaint with the court of the judiciary in Nashville concerning "the untimely resolution of this matter."

Although Judge Bell filed a response denying that he had failed to comply with any of the canons of judicial ethics, "when it became obvious that the judgment in question had never been forwarded to any of the parties as required by law," he summoned those on both sides of the lawsuit to his office on December 23, 2008, to discuss the matter.

Daniel alleges that "Judge Bell thereupon entered an order which vacated the previous dismissal and encouraged Mr. Pleau to file a new action against the other driver."

Pleau then filed a complaint against Coleman which Judge Bell heard in general sessions court on April 27, 2009.

As a result of that hearing, Judge Bell "rendered a decision in favor of Mr. Pleau and against Jo Ann Coleman and Merastar Insurance Company which recited identical findings of facts and conclusions of law as to the allocation [of] fault and amount of damages as had previously been determined by Judge Bell," Daniel alleges in the complaint, adding that the judge found Coleman 100 percent at fault and assessed a $4,726.78 judgment against her.

"It is alleged that John Bell was prejudiced against Jo Ann Coleman in the hearing of this matter [because] he had previously expressed an opinion on the responsibility and damages in this exact controversy," the complaint continues.

Daniel's complaint alleges that in January or early February of this year, "Judge Bell initiated and...directed a scheme designed to influence Mr. Pleau to dismiss his complaint in the court of the judiciary."

 

Newport Attorney Named

The complaint claims that Judge Bell enlisted Newport attorney Tom Testerman "to approach Mr. Pleau on behalf of Judge Bell in a direct and unequivocal effort to induce Mr. Pleau to cease the pursuit of his complaint in the court of the judiciary."

Testerman is alleged to have contacted Pleau by telephone on February 2 and "explained to Pleau that Judge Bell knew that it would be improper for him to contact Mr. Pleau directly," the complaint states.

"Specifically during this telephone conversation, Mr. Testerman asked Mr. Pleau to come in and sign a document to dismiss his complaint in the court of the judiciary against Judge Bell," the complaint continues.

Testerman is alleged to have acted on behalf of Judge Bell as a result of a meeting in the hallway of the Cocke County Courthouse last February 2. Testerman is not accused in Daniel's complaint of any wrongdoing or violations of legal ethics.

When interviewed by representatives of the court of the judiciary, Testerman said he contacted Pleau on February 2 "in an effort to determine if Mr. Pleau was still interested in pursuing his complaint.

"The call of February 2 was made within weeks of the setting of Mr. Pleau's second lawsuit against the uninsured motorist and after Judge Bell, on December 23, 2008, had set aside the first decision which had not been properly noticed to the parties," the complaint continues.

Judge Bell has 30 days in which to file a formal answer to Daniel's complaint. The disciplinary counsel is asking that a full hearing on the complaint be conducted within 60 days of the filing of Judge Bell's answer or within 90 days if no answer is filed.

That hearing would be held in the Cocke County Courthouse.