Wednesday, August 21, 1996

County reveals $700,000 in Wade suit

By Sherry Koonce

Sins of the past figured greatly in a landmark whistleblower case settlement awarded to a former Panola County Road and Bridge employee this week, who was fired from his job more than a year ago after spreading a small amount of milled asphalt in a private driveway.

Settled during a nine hour mediation process conducted in Travis County, the $700,000 award granted Jimmy Wade was one for the record books.

According to Wade's attorney, Charles W. Nichols, of Palestine, the amount to be paid is the largest pre-trial settlement awarded since the Whistleblower Act was enacted in 1983.

In a prepared statement read Monday, County Judge John Cordray acknowledged details of the settlement, but was quick to point out the cash award was in no means an admission of guilt. Rather, he stated, it was the best the county could do in a lose-lose situation.

Wade attorney Charles W. Nichols holds
press conference

Accusations of county wrong-doings leveled against the county by Wade stemmed from the March 20^th 1995, incident when he and another road and bridge employee, David Cole, placed approximately $50 worth of oil dirt in the drive of his assistant foreman, Randall Bellamy. At the time, Wade said he had carried out Bellamy's instructions and that the act, albeit it illegal, was a longstanding practice in Panola County and one that Precinct 2 commissioner Buddy Harris set as example.

Wade's anger over his own dismissal was not dampened by the fact that a 1991 grand jury had no-billed Harris, who was facing felony charges of professional misconduct after it came to light the commissioner had allowed a Panola County businessman to take $2,250 worth of oil dirt from the county's stockpile. During the course of the 1991 investigation, Harris admitted he had loaned Smith the key to the county's storage room.

Wade was terminated from his position along with Cole, while Bellamy opted to resign. Shortly after the firings, Wade sought assistance under the Texas Whistleblower Act, charging he had been terminated from his job after reporting violations of law by county officials to his supervisors as well as the Panola County District Attorney as early as 1994. Wade also alleged he had contacted members of the FBI with details relating to illegal activities being performed by road oil company, Bryan and Bryan. That information, directly resulted in a federal indictment against the Henderson-based company and a subsequent plea bargain entered in the case last July.

In explaining the county's decision to settle the matter before it reached a Travis County jury, Cordray read from a letter dated August 17 addressed to him from the county's attorney, R.L. Whitehead.

"In 1991, (when Cordray took office) you committed to operating the county on an open and honest basis. Unfortunately, for years prior to that time there is evidence that this was not the case. As a result of your actions, certain of the employees of the county became disgruntled. The evaluation of this case was made in large part because of "sins of the past" of employees and elected officials of Panola County. This is the reason that I recommended ... a settlement in this case wrote Whitehead.

Whitehead also stressed the settlement was not an admission of liability on behalf of the county, but represented the county "buying its peace."

But some audience members were unconvinced and noted the $250,000 to be absorbed by taxpayers was "money well spent."

Although the bulk of the settlement will be paid by the county's insurance carrier, National Casualty Insurance Company, the remaining $250,000 will have to be shouldered by taxpayers— a fact that at least one audience member approved of.

"I think this is the best money the county has ever spent. It is time the county was held accountable for the good 'ole boy system," noted Linda Boothe.

Also figuring in the decision to settle out-of-court was an exclusionary clause written into the contract with the county's insurance company, National Casualty Insurance Company.

According to Cordray, insurance company representatives agreed to pay the first $450,000 of the settlement and noted that should the case go to trial and a jury return a guilty verdict, they would be exempt from their responsibilities. In view of a possible $3.85 million award, Wade's attorneys indicated they would seek should the case go to trial, Cordray said he felt this was the least painful way to resolve the situation.

"As distasteful as it was, we had to take this action that we thought was in the county's best interest and then today come over here and bend over and let you kick us in the ass, as you have today," Cordray stated.

Cordray also cited other reasons factoring into the decision to pay Wade, including a myriad of events transpiring after the suit was filed in the 200th Judicial District Court of Travis County.

Chief among them was the fact that the judge did not allow a continuance in the case that would allow testimony from FBI officials investigating charges leveled against Bryan and Bryan. According to Cordray, FBI officials would have testified in favor of Panola County, but because the road supplier case had not been completely settled, they were bound to silence until the road supplier case was concluded. Also working against the county was Wade's acceptance on Social Security disability rolls this past year, combined with testimony concerning Wade's mental health from a noted Austin psychiatrist and a related diagnosis from MHMR professionals.

Also helping to unravel the county's case was the inadmissibility of David Cole's deposition, which had been thrown out by the judge earlier when it became apparent he had not actually reported any pursued illegal activities to higher-ups. The contents of his deposition, said Cordray, significantly strengthened the county's case.

Cole had been included in the original Whistleblower suit, but was dismissed on a summary judgement. According to Nichols, Cole is still represented by his firm.

In addition to the negative decisions rendered against Panola County by judges involved with the case, County Attorney Robert Underwood also cited a current tone surrounding Whistleblower cases in Travis County as a strong determinant in the decision to settle Wade's case outside of court.

"With the political tone in Travis County where this case had to be tried under the old Whistle blower's Act and the liberal verdicts in Whistleblower cases together with the historical facts which we would have to face at the time of trial certainly called for a prudent person to pause and reflect on potential losses for Panola County," noted Underwood in a letter written to Cordray.

Underwood went on to describe the $1 million Whistleblower case verdict delivered against the University of Texas just one day after Panola County decided to settle its dispute with Wade out of court.

"This was the hardest decision I have ever had to make—not only as county judge but in my entire working career, "said Cordray. "I still maintain we had a responsibility to the people of Panola County to come out of this the best way we could."

Home