KNOXVILLE -- The five justices of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, sitting in Knoxville, listened for an hour Thursday morning to opposing arguments in an unusual case involving a Greene County circuit judge and a Greeneville law firm.

The local jurist is Circuit Judge John K. Wilson, and the law firm is Rogers, Laughlin, Nunnally, Hood & Crum, P.C.

Speaking on behalf of Judge Wilson, although not officially representing him, was Thomas L. Kilday, of Milligan & Coleman.

The Rogers firm and Milligan & Coleman are the community's two largest law firms.

The Rogers law firm was represented by two Knoxville attorneys, Ann C. Short-Bowers and Ralph E. Harwell.

The Supreme Court of Tennessee is headed by recently elevated Chief Justice Janice M. Holder. Seated beside her in Knoxville were fellow justices William M. Barker, Cornelia A. Clark, Gary R. Wade and William C. Koch Jr.

All five of the Supreme Court's justices asked questions during the hearing, which was strictly limited to an hour -- 30 minutes for each side.

The Supreme Court is reviewing Judge Wilson's handling of a Hawkins County case filed by a client of the Rogers firm in May 2003.

It is a personal injury tort action in which the client, plaintiff Brandon T. Bean, alleges injuries when his car collided with a horse on July 12, 2002.

Steve Bailey, Thomas N. Sturgill and Terri Lynn Lemons are defendants in the case and are represented by Kilday and colleague Thomas J. Garland Jr.

The Rogers firm contends that Judge Wilson should have recused himself and directed that the case be heard by another judge in view of years of acrimony and tension between the judge and members of the Rogers law firm.

In addition, attorneys Short-Bowers and Harwell called on the state's highest court to render a broad ruling that would establish clear guidelines as to when a Tennessee judge whose fairness is being challenged should disqualify himself from hearing a case. They said such a statewide guideline is now lacking.

In accordance with its normal practice, the Supreme Court of Tennessee is not expected to issue its decision for months. The decision will eventually be issued in a written "opinion."

Short-Bowers began her 20-minute statement on behalf of the Rogers law firm by declaring, "Judicial impartiality is absolutely essential for the fair operation of the courts," not only on behalf of the litigants, but to ensure public confidence in the judicial system.

She referred to written comments made by Judge Wilson in a 1996 document filed with the Supreme Court when he recognized that his "impartiality ... might reasonably be questioned from an objective standpoint."

Among those written comments of Judge Wilson cited were a statement by the judge in the document that "John Rogers has told a person or persons that he was short, fat, ugly, poor, and that his classmates made fun of him, and that his lifelong desire was to be rich and powerful."

Short-Bowers also quoted the 1996 document that Judge Wilson had submitted as stating that William S. Nunnally, a partner in the Rogers firm, "grew up with a 'chip' on his shoulder and with an ego and attitude that no one knows anything but him."

She said the "frosty" relations between Judge Wilson and members of the Rogers law firm over the years are undisputed.

Short-Bowers said that in a Sept. 24, 2007, hearing, Judge Wilson erred in refusing to disqualify himself from hearing the Bean case from Hawkins County despite requests from the Rogers law firm that he send the case to another, impartial judge.

She noted that on Feb. 15, 2007, all members of the Rogers, Laughlin, Nunnally, Hood & Crum law firm sent a letter to Judge Wilson asking that he recuse himself from all present and future cases involving any members of the firm. She said Judge Wilson did not reply to that request.

After that, the Rogers firm twice asked Judge Kindall T. Lawson, of Hawkins County, the presiding judge of the Third Judicial District, to have Judge Wilson exempted from hearing the law firm's cases, with the cases to be reassigned to the other circuit judges.

However, the Rogers law firm says, "No reassignment occurred."

In the Sept. 24, 2007, hearing at which Harwell introduced himself, Judge Wilson, according to the court record, stated, "The Court feels it can try the case and be fair and impartial."

Harwell responded at that time that a judicial rule "instructs that a judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his impartiality 'might reasonably be questioned.' "

Judge Wilson in September 2007 denied a motion by Harwell "to develop the record" on behalf of the Rogers firm.

Kilday spoke for 30 minutes on behalf of Judge Wilson although he is not formally the judge's attorney.

Much of the justices' focus in raising questions from the bench was on the Sept. 24, 2007, hearing at which Judge Wilson refused to recuse himself from the Bean case.

At the time, Judge Wilson had said, "The Court has had certain officials look into the matter" and "The Court believes it can be fair and impartial."

Judge Wilson did not say at that time with which officials he had conferred, the record shows.

Justice Koch questioned Judge Wilson's reasoning, asking Kilday, "Can't we at least agree he was using the wrong standard?"

Kilday responded that Judge Wilson has a 25-year record of being a fair judge.

Chief Justice Holder said the Supreme Court cannot rely just on Judge Wilson's having said in September 2007, that a "mystery person" whom the judge never named had told him "he was cleared to try" the Bean case.

Kilday responded that, to be fair, the Supreme Court "must look at the entire record" of Judge Wilson.

But Justice Barker interjected that Judge Wilson hadn't allowed the Rogers firm to place "anything on the record" during the September 2007 hearing.

Justice Wade said, "Something seems to be lost here. That is the right of the parties to a trial and, hopefully, a speedy trial."

Kilday contended that it would be a mistake for the Supreme Court, by barring Judge Wilson from hearing cases involving the Rogers law firm, to change the recently-adopted system now in effect in the Third Judicial Circuit under which cases are randomly assigned to the three circuit judges.

Toward the end of the hearing, Justice Koch said, "We have to start at the foundation, and the standard is whether a reasonable person" reviewing the handling of a case "can determine if a judge can be fair."

Justice Clark, noting that Kilday officially was not representing Judge Wilson, asked him why he was arguing "so fiercely" on the Greene County judge's behalf.

Kilday, who has long practiced before the judge, replied, "I believe Judge Wilson can provide every party a fair trial."

Harwell, speaking for the Rogers law firm in the final 10 minutes of the hearing, referred to Judge Wilson's written 1996 statement to the Supreme Court that his "impartiality ... might reasonably be questioned from an objective standpoint."

Harwell called that "a judicial confession."

He said that over the years "there is no showing that the attitude [of Judge Wilson] has changed" toward members of the Rogers law firm.

Harwell called on the Supreme Court of Tennessee to render a broad decision that would apply to all Tennessee courts to make it clear what procedures must be followed when a judge's ablity to fairly hear a case is questioned.

He closed by asking the Supreme Court in its decision "to set up a better procedure" to be followed in such instances statewide.

Judge Wilson did not attend the hearing. He previously told The Greeenville Sun, "I won't be there ... I am not allowed to be a party (in the case), and I'm not a party in it."

Among those attending the hearing -- but not addressing the state's highest court during its 9 to 10 a.m. hearing -- were John T. Milburn Rogers and Jerry W. Laughlin, representing their law firm, as well as several members of Rogers' family.

(For a more detailed review of the arguments made in previous years between the two sides, see the Sun's Sept. 3 article.)