Ethics Violation: Athens Town Judge Accused of Financially Benefiting Own Company Through Court Contract

ATHENS, N.Y. – E. Timothy Mercer, a part-time judge on the Athens Town Court, has come under scrutiny for using his judicial position to benefit his personal company financially. The state Commission on Judicial Conduct recently released a report detailing their findings and recommending Mercer’s removal from office. The report revealed that Mercer awarded a no-bid contract to his own company for courthouse improvements, while falsifying and altering an invoice for the work. These actions were taken without disclosing his personal financial interest and against the concerns raised by the court clerk.

In October of 2020, Mercer instructed a clerk to include a security camera system in the town court’s grant application for court improvements. This addition, totaling $2,329.99 for the equipment and $1,000 for installation, was not approved by the Town Board. However, the Office of Justice Court Support awarded most of the requested funds, with the condition that any remaining funds would require further direction from the court. Instead of opening the installation to a competitive bidding process, Mercer awarded the contract to his own company, Mercer Associates, without attempting to conceal his ownership. Furthermore, he purchased a camera that was $760 cheaper than the one specified in the application.

When the court clerk expressed concerns about Mercer performing the installation, he disregarded her and proceeded with the work himself. Despite the appearance of impropriety, Mercer continued to seek payment for the installation, submitting an invoice that misrepresented the actual cost. The town’s bookkeeper flagged the invoice for its conflict of interest, leading to the withholding of payment. As the state Commission on Judicial Conduct initiated an investigation, Mercer became aware of the potential consequences and wrote an email acknowledging the ethical issue.

In their determination, the Commission on Judicial Conduct cited Mercer’s self-dealing and dishonesty with town and court officials as undermining public confidence in the integrity of the courts. They recommended his removal from the bench, a move that would prevent him from ever returning to a judicial position. Mercer has the option to appeal this determination within 30 days, but if he does not, the Court of Appeals will finalize his removal.

The findings of the report have highlighted the need for accountability and integrity in the judicial system. Instances like these erode public trust and cast doubt on the fairness of the court proceedings. It is crucial for judges to prioritize their duty to the law and the public over personal gain. The state Commission on Judicial Conduct’s decision to recommend Mercer’s removal serves as a reminder that unethical behavior will not be tolerated within the judicial system.

In the case of E. Timothy Mercer, a part-time judge in Athens, N.Y., the state Commission on Judicial Conduct has found that he used his position on the bench to financially benefit his own company. The commission released a report recommending Mercer’s removal from office after it was discovered that he awarded a no-bid contract to his own company for courthouse improvements. He also falsified and altered an invoice for the work without disclosing his personal financial interest.

According to the report, Mercer instructed a clerk to add a security camera system to the town court’s grant application for court improvements. This addition was not approved by the Town Board, but the Office of Justice Court Support awarded most of the requested funds with the condition that any remaining funds would require further direction from the court. Mercer bypassed a competitive bidding process and awarded the contract to his company, Mercer Associates. He even purchased a cheaper camera than the one specified in the application.

Despite the concerns raised by the court clerk, Mercer proceeded to install the security camera himself. He then submitted an invoice that misrepresented the actual cost of the camera system. The town’s bookkeeper flagged this invoice for the conflict of interest, resulting in the withholding of payment. As a result, the state Commission on Judicial Conduct opened an investigation into Mercer’s actions.

The commission’s determination stated that Mercer’s actions of self-dealing and dishonesty undermine public confidence in the integrity of the courts. Consequently, they recommended his removal from the bench to prevent any further service. Mercer has the opportunity to appeal this determination, but if he does not, the Court of Appeals will proceed with his removal.

This case underscores the importance of ethical conduct and accountability within the judicial system. Judges must uphold their duty to the law and the public, avoiding any appearance of impropriety. The state Commission on Judicial Conduct’s decision to recommend Mercer’s removal sends a clear message that unethical behavior will not be tolerated in the justice system.