AIKEN --- Former James Brown trustees might have an uphill battle proving they were improperly forced to resign by Judge Jack Early.

It's rare in South Carolina for a judge to have been found guilty of the accusations former trustees Buddy Dallas and Alford Bradley are lodging against Judge Early, said Richard Gershon, the dean of the Charleston School of Law.

"It's very unusual," he said.

It's the judge's job, Mr. Gershon explained, to "look at the best interest of the trusts."

In court papers filed at the end of November, Mr. Dallas and Mr. Bradley accuse the judge overseeing the legal challenges to the singer's estate of using "improper judicial influence" to get their resignations.

They quit before a hearing to determine whether the accusations of wrongdoing were true, but they now say they did so only because Judge Early overstepped his judicial bounds. They want to take back their resignations.

Without speaking about the Brown legal challenges specifically, Mr. Gershon said judges generally are allowed "a lot of latitude. They're in a position where they're the finders of fact and law in many cases, and we want to give them the latitude to do it in certain parameters.

"We want to make sure they're not serving their own interests, but the interests of the parties and justice," he elaborated.

Judge Early's law clerk said he could not comment on ongoing cases.

Mr. Dallas said he felt pressured by Judge Early to quit. Both he and Mr. Bradley had handled the singer's financial affairs for many years but were accused of misconduct earlier this year, allegations that were never cleared up.

Mr. Dallas and Mr. Bradley -- who had long handled Mr. Brown's legal and financial affairs -- say Judge Early made up his mind about them before ever hearing any evidence of misconduct.

They accuse Judge Early of:

- Sending a letter to all attorneys involved in the legal challenges that encouraged their lawyers to talk to them about resigning.

- Getting estate attorneys, who did not represent either Mr. Dallas or Mr. Bradley personally, to send them a letter encouraging them to resign. The letter, from Jonathan Harling, said the judge was "strongly" considering firing them as trustees and that resigning would spare them from a public hearing that would "be the subject of media attention."

- Saying in chambers before the Nov. 20 hearing that if the two "did not resign, it would get ugly and that sanctions and attorney's fees would be imposed if we proceeded."

Mr. Gershon said that if the trustees are successful in proving their point of view, then Judge Early could be recused from the case.

"But it would take a lot, and you would have to show that the judge had a personal interest that outweighed finding a just decision for the trust," Mr. Gershon said. "So you'd have to prove some personal bias for the judge."

Robert Rosen, who represents Mr. Brown's disputed fourth wife, had nothing but compliments for Judge Early, calling him "one of the most respected -- if not the most respected -- circuit judge in South Carolina."

"His conduct has been exemplary -- in the face of people misleading the court, defying and disobeying his orders, invoking the Fifth Amendment in response to questions about estate assets and generally making a mess of the estate of James Brown," Mr. Rosen said, referring to recent testimony from a third former trustee, David Cannon, who is accused of misappropriating as much as $7 million of Mr. Brown's money.

Mr. Cannon refused to answer many questions about his finances or his role in managing Mr. Brown's money, citing his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

Mr. Gershon said all trusts could face some financial questions because the trustees overseeing them are paid for their services.

Whether that personal interest outweighs the role of working for the beneficiaries is something that must be considered, he said.

"It's unfortunate," he said. "It seems like when there's a lot of money at stake, and it's a high-profile estate like this one, the issues become even harder to resolve, it seems. Which is a shame because nobody wins when there's this ongoing battle over an estate."

Reach Sandi Martin at (803) 648-1395, ext. 111, or sandi.martin@augustachronicle.com