Court Opinion

ID: 9680757
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:38:14.295631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:30.298497
License: Public Domain

*486TODD, J.,
concurs in a separate opinion.
BLACKBURN, Special Judge, concurs.
APPENDIX A
May 30, 1974 Nashville Banner Article INTENSE DEALING COULD INFLUENCE COURT PICKS
By ED LONG
Intense political maneuvering that has been termed by one insider as “a hell of a lot of dealing” may determine the nominations for the State Supreme Court.
Jockeying, dealing and political pressure are all part of the picture as candidates are attempting to be selected by the State Democratic Executive Committee for the five slots on the ticket for the high court.
The 36 member committee meets here Saturday to narrow a list of eight candidates recommended by the Judicial Selection Commission to five nominees.
But there are some other persons with hats in the ring. And through these persons, deals are being discussed. A “package deal” coming out of West Tennessee focuses on the state attorney general position as being the pawn that could push one candidate onto the ticket.
Indications from Memphis are that former chancellor Robert L. Taylor is attempting to get enough votes to overthrow the recommendation of Justice William H. D. Fones.
Taylor is actively seeking the nomination possibly by working a deal with the liberal element of the executive committee whereby Judicial Selection Commission member Russell Sugarman, a black, would be made attorney general if a “slate” is selected including Taylor.
East Tennessee has for years been the division with only one justice and the attorney general. The Supreme Court selects the attorney general.
The committee is composed of 18 men and 18 women. It is reported that Nashville lawyer Bonnie Cowan is seeking to get the support of the women of the committee.
Three of those recommended by the Selection Commission obviously will not be nominated, but it may be because they have been “cut out” of a deal.
State Sen. Ed Gillock of Memphis, who appeared before the commission as a candidate for the high court and was not recommended, reportedly said there is such a deal being made among committee members.
Gillock said that he is running for the Supreme Court nomination. He is busy contacting committee members to attempt to get their votes. “The situation is very, very fluid at this time and that’s all I can say,” the senator said.
One member, Ronald Borod, was targeted as the force behind Fones.
A Memphis lawyer and member of the committee, he said today, “I’m not interested in any deals or trading. I’m a supporter of Justice Fones and I’m interested in the other four seats.
“I’m not part of any move and I don’t know about such a move.”
Borod is a former law partner of Fones. He said that the justice is “trying to meet personally with the committee members.”
Choose Slate
Sen. William Peeler, Waverly, said, “I think there’s going to be an effort made to choose a date (sic) of candidates the panel selected.
“There will also be some candidates that will run who were not recommended by the commission. I would expect Bob Taylor would run regardless of what the commission did.”
About the possibility of a deal between the candidates to also place a sixth person into consideration who would be named attorney general if a “package” was selected, Peeler said, “There’s been some discussion along those lines. I don’t know how serious the discussions have been.”
The veteran lawmaker indicated that the candidates may be more interested in securing their own nominations than in selecting the attorney general.
*487Will Cheek of Nashville, secretary of the committee, said “I haven’t seen a block vote or ‘slate’ happen yet and I don’t think it will because of the interpersonal relationship among committee members.” He did say that all of the candidates had called him and sent letters to him as well as other members.
“Judges are aware that this type of dealing is illegal, not to mention unjudicial,” Cheek said.
Method of Balloting
Gilbert S. Merritt, Jr., the legal counsel for the Judicial Selection Commission, and Cheek both said that the problem the committee will face Saturday will be in the method of balloting.
The committee will choose a nominee from each of the state’s three grand divisions and two at-large candidates.
Merritt indicated that the order in which the candidates are chosen could be extremely important.
Two of the nominees said earlier this week that the important question will be the number of nominees from East Tennessee, which has traditionally only been represented by one justice. With three candidates, it may be that that section of the state will receive two justices in this election.
With only two candidates from West Tennessee, some observers have said that either Fones or Chief Justice Dyer will be dropped from the ticket if a “deal” is consummated.
The chairman of the Judicial Selection Commission, former Vanderbilt Law School Dean John Wade, said today, “I gather there has been some discussion” about the voting Saturday.
“It is not impossible for the candidates to get together but the members of the State Executive Committee would react adversely,” Wade said.
In addition to Fones, Dyer and Cowan, those being considered are Nashville lawyer William Harbison, Chattanooga Chancellor Ray Brock, Pulaski lawyer Joe Henry, and Courts of Appeals Judges Charles O’Brien of Crossville and Robert Cooper of Knoxville.

May 31, 1974 Nashville Banner Article

Democratic Committeewoman Tells of Attempt to Influence High Court Vote SHRIVER PROBING BRIBE TRY
By LARRY BRINTON
A member of the State Democratic Executive Committee today said an attempt was made this week to “buy my vote” for Memphis Attorney Robert Taylor in Saturday’s committee election for State Supreme Court nominees.
The charge was leveled by Mrs. Helen A. Brown, of 1811 Beech Ave., and a detailed probe has been launched into the allegation by the staff of Dist. Atty. Gen. Thomas Shriver.
The State Democratic Executive Committee member said the alleged bribe attempt was made Tuesday at her home by a man and woman, whose names she could not recall, but could identify.
“How much financing would it take to get your vote,” Mrs. Brown said the man asked after she told him she had not made up her mind as to whom she would vote for Saturday and he allegedly had suggested she vote for Taylor as one of five Democratic nominees.
“My vote is not for sale,” the woman said she replied. Mrs. Brown said the answer “irritated” the woman, about 55 years old, who had originally telephoned her on May 23.
Election to Continue
James Sasser, chairman of the State Democratic Executive Committee, said the election will continue Saturday as planned.
“We plan to continue our meeting as planned and to nominate our Supreme Court justices,” Sasser explained “I think this sort of attempt to influence voters is reprehensible, and shocking and I think Mrs. Brown is to be congratulated for coming forward.”
*488The committee chairman said the nominees must be certified before the June 6 Democratic Primary election and the election must be held Saturday as planned.
Meantime, Shriver said his investigators began the probe this morning.
“We can’t anticipate how long the investigation is going to take, but I doubt seriously it will be completed by Saturday,” he commented.
The district attorney said he believed his investigators had learned the identity of the woman and expect to learn from her the man’s identity.
Taylor could not be reached for comment. His Memphis law firm reported he was in Nashville for the weekend.
First Contact May 23
Mrs. Brown, serving her first term on the executive committee, said the woman had first contacted her by telephone May 23 stating she wanted to discuss the Davidson County Democratic Executive Committee with her.
“She said she wanted to talk to me about the election of a chairman for the county election committee and she said she also wanted to feel me out on some of the candidates that are coming up for the court nomination,” Mrs. Brown told the Banner.
After discussing politics for a few minutes on the telephone, Mrs. Brown said it was agreed that the woman, who identified herself to the committeewoman, would visit Mrs. Brown said, referring to the continue the conversation.
“She came Tuesday, but she didn’t say she was going to have anyone with her,” Mrs. Brown said, referring to the man who told her he worked at the Metro Courthouse.
“She introduced herself, but I’m not very good on names,” she commented. “He introduced himself, also.”
“We talked about the county executive committee and she said she didn’t like the way things were being run, that people were telling you how to vote and who to vote for,” Mrs. Brown recalled.
“I said that politics is kind of dirty and gets nasty sometimes,” she added. It was then, Mrs. Brown said, that the unidentified man began naming some of the nominees for the justice posts on the State Supreme Court.
“They asked me who I was in favor of,” she said. “I said nobody in particular right now and that my mind was not really made up since I had until Saturday morning to reach a conclusion.
“This man spoke up and said ‘how do you feel about Taylor? I feel like he’s the man for the job.’ ”
Taylor Discussed
Mrs. Brown said she told the couple that she didn’t favor Taylor over any of the other candidates.
“He said Taylor had done so much for the blacks in the Civil Rights movement.” The committee member said they then discussed Taylor’s role as chairman of Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s Tennessee presidential campaign bid.
“That’s when he asked me ‘How much financing would it take to get your vote’, Mrs. Brown stated. After stating she wouldn’t sell her vote, she said the man said, “I don’t want to pressure you, but I wish you would think about it.”
After turning down the alleged bribe attempt, Mrs. Brown said, the man “sort of smiled and tried to approach me at a different angle, but the woman called me ‘hardheaded’ and ‘stubborn’.”
Mrs. Brown said the man telephoned her Thursday, again identified himself, and inquired if she had changed her mind. The woman said she answered that she still had not decided how she would vote Saturday.
Mrs. Brown later contacted her attorney, Gilbert Merritt, who took a statement from her and turned it over to Shriver.
Taylor was one of a flock of democrats who sought recommendation to the State Supreme Court by a special commission named by the Democratic Executive Committee.
*489The commission recommended eight persons, from which the executive committee can nominate five. Taylor was not one of the eight, but he still hopes to be one of the five nominees.
In its meeting Saturday, the executive committee is under no obligation to choose from the eight people recommended by the special commission.
Committee members privately have confided that the political infighting and dealing for the five posts have been fierce.