Bankruptcy Twists, Courtroom Calamity, and the Ever-Changing Cast of LLC's

Auction that was planned for 323 McJunkin Road Has been 'Postponed'

Update on the Auction: It was allowed to continue and on 11/13/2025 the property was bought by a local family...

Just when everyone thought the long-awaited auction at 323 McJunkin Road in Tellico Plains might finally close the book on this wild saga — the chairs were almost set, the gavel polished, the auctioneer ready — everything stopped cold.

Now, Billy — a man with what seems like barely a third-grade education — has managed, with the help of the more schooled Daniela, to upend the Monroe County court system for years. Together, they’ve filed, appealed, delayed, and maneuvered their way through the legal thicket like seasoned performers in a courthouse sideshow that began 4 years ago.

Even John Cleveland, a respected attorney known for representing well-heeled clients, was drawn into the spectacle. Taking the plaintiff’s case on consignment, Cleveland stepped far outside his usual clientele — a move that’s had locals wondering whether he regrets trading his high-dollar suits for muddy boots in this Tellico tangle.

A bankruptcy filing dropped like a thunderclap, and the court ruled the auction cancelled. The formerly Miami based Daniela, is Billy's newest gal/pal and loyal co-pilot in this bumpy legal ride. The 323 McJunkin property had been sold to her by Billy, after being purchased from Marion Hamby, and with the bankruptcy now in play, the entire case is likely frozen in legal ice for years to come.

At the heart of the lawsuit, though, was something far more personal than paperwork: Billy’s former girlfriend claimed she had put up 40% of the original purchase money to help him buy the McJunkin Road house. Billy, of course, told a different tale — that the money wasn’t a contribution at all, but a debt she owed him, and that the lawsuit was nothing more than the work of “a woman scorned.”

Still, the courts didn’t seem to buy that argument — and Billy’s next moves only made things murkier. Taking matters into his own hands, he marched into the Tennessee Court of Appeals, representing himself in what would become one of the most talked-about pro se appeals in Monroe County history.

It was fifteen minutes of courtroom calamity, full of sharp turns, contradictions, and unintentional comedy. At one point, Billy argued that the plaintiff’s lawsuit was invalid because it was filed after his LLC had been dissolved. Billy “Whiskey Barrel” had quietly dissolved Whiskey Barrel Trading LLC soon after the sale to Daniela--apparently unaware that an LLC can still be sued after dissolution.

And, he denies ever bragging about being rich — though earlier he’d boasted about yachts and his supposed fortune. Later, he tries to smooth over a misstep involving the Carson Law Firm, first saying they handled “eleven real estate transactions” for him, then quickly downgrading that claim to “situations.”

After 4 Years of Legal Wrangling, the Case Has Gone to Potts

Due to Bankruptcy Filing--Court Rules Auction Cancelled--Case May be Delayed for Years... 😩😩😩😩😩😩😩😩😩😩😩😩  "Where's that Whiskey Barrel Mamaw?"

Update on the Auction: It was allowed to continue and on 11/13/2025 the property was bought by a local family...

                                                                                                                                                                 Billy Smith Whiskeybarrel Trading LLC' fought the local circuit court verdict for years in Monroe County TN, then tried to appeal the ruling before the Tennessee Court of Appeals without a lawyer--it is seen as one of the worst pro-se appeals by a non-lawyer litigant--a litany of shocking insults against the former girlfriend did not help his 15-minute oral argument. 

At 6:50 minutes into the oral argument video there are inconsistencies in his remarks; saying that comments about 'him being rich and had yachts' were false but he bragged about his wealth earlier. 

Many other blunders, at 13.58 saying that he had 'the police' working on the case for him!  ... and "I was never given time to understand the law."  

It was confusing from the start: the first words out of his mouth, and you think 'WTF' did he say...? 

He currently uses (or did use) the screen name Rusty Trucks on Facebook...

Newsflash Billy--Makes no difference what shell company name or LLC you hide under--An LLC can still be sued after it's dissolution.

In 2024 the case was dismissed by the Tennessee Appeals Court--this link has the opinion of the court,  https://www.tncourts.gov/courts/court-appeals/opinions/2024/09/27/robyn-h-hurvitz-v-whiskey-barrel-trading-company-llc-et-al

Sheriff Jones refers to local drug dealers as "Our Guys" ...watch the chubby cop in back

Sheriff Tommy Jones refers to local drug dealers as "our guys" -- it shows the symbiotic relationship that often exists between criminals and law enforcement. A while back, Tommy's father Constable Tommy Jones Sr. was arrested by the TBI for sale of narcotics, see video below: he told the news reporter that he 'shouldn't comment' (although he did) and wasn't really worried, that the 'lawyer' would take care of it. Referring to local drug dealers as "our guys" suggests a few things about that symbiotic relationship. 

Undercover 'drug buyers' or 'protected drug dealers/users' ...It may have been another 'slip of the tongue' and likely gone unnoticed by most--but it's a very incisive observation about the complex and often murky relationship that can exist between certain elements of law enforcement and the criminal underworld.

1. Maintaining Equilibrium (The "Devil You Know"): In some cases, authorities might prefer a known, somewhat predictable drug dealer (or low-level operator) over the chaos that could ensue if a power vacuum opened up, leading to turf wars or the entry of a more violent organization. They become "their guys" because they are part of a manageable, albeit illegal, status quo.

2. Corruption or Collusion: On the darkest end of the spectrum, the phrase could point to outright corruption, where officers are actively protecting or benefiting from the criminal enterprise.

3. Informant Network/Control: The phrase implies that these specific criminals are known and perhaps tolerated or even utilized as informants. Law enforcement might see them as "their guys" because they provide information on larger, more dangerous operations or rival criminal groups.

This kind of statement highlights the ethical gray areas and the practical realities that can challenge the idealized view of law enforcement simply eradicating crime. The "symbiotic" element is that the criminals (the dealers) provide a service (information, stability), and law enforcement provides a service (protection, tolerance) in return.

Sheriff Jones Grills Medical Examiner then 'facebooks it' --does it influence the jury pool?

Sheriff Tommy Jones was in a 'meltdown mode' since the grand jury indictments were announced naming several MCSD staff members on 9/3/2025 over the homicide of Pastor Lester Isbill. 

It is not in a local sheriff's official capacity to call and lodge a litany of questions to a medical examiner-as shown on several news sites.

The legal proceeding has now become "tainted" and the entire process has been compromised.

In the United States, there have been documented instances where law enforcement agencies or individual officers have been accused of influencing or interfering with homicide investigations. These cases often involve police misconduct, corruption, or a deliberate effort to protect officers from prosecution.

"The administration of justice is sacred" the legal and judicial systems are not just a set of rules, but something to be revered and protected. Posting intimate details in several news outlets of a private conversation he had with the Medical Examiner...? It may be the biggest blunder of his career--In Tennessee, a public official who overtly tries to influence a jury pool could face a combination of criminal charges and other legal penalties. 

This WBIR link  details the Q and A, but bear in mind it is a transcription, which can be be slanted and falsified--not an audio recording. You can bet that if it really did happen Jones and his handlers made an audio recording of the alleged conversation. ...It starts with "During a recent phone call I had with Dr. Suzuki, the pathologist who performed Mr. Isbill’s autopsy, from the Regional Forensic Center in Knox County.

Official Misconduct: This is a serious charge specifically for public servants. Under Tennessee Code Ann. § 39-16-402, a public servant commits this offense if, with intent to gain a benefit or harm another, they intentionally or knowingly:

• Commit an act related to their office that is an unauthorized exercise of official power.

• Commit an act under color of office that exceeds their official power.

• Penalty: This is a Class E felony. A conviction can also lead to the official being removed from office and disqualified from holding any office in the state in the future.

A Coroner's determination is not a criminal verdict--police officers can and do ask questions and present evidence to a coroner, they cannot legally compel a coroner to change their finding. The coroner's decision is based on their own medical and investigative findings, which may include an autopsy.

Not a Mensa member

A sheriff should not "grill" a forensic investigator because the sheriff's role is administrative, not investigative. A forensic investigator's job is to provide objective scientific analysis, and their findings are used by prosecutors to build a case. 

If anyone is going to question the forensic investigator, it would be a prosecutor or a defense attorney in a court of law—not a sheriff. This is to ensure the integrity of the evidence and the legal process.This happens under oath in court. The defense attorney then has a chance to cross-examine the investigator.

The core of the issue is the potential for prejudicial publicity. When a high-ranking public official like a sheriff makes public statements about an ongoing investigation, it can:

• Taint the jury pool: Potential jurors may form an opinion on the case based on the sheriff's public statements, making it difficult to seat an unbiased jury.

• Influence witnesses: Witnesses, including the coroner, might feel pressured to align their testimony with the narrative presented by the sheriff.

• Create a perception of guilt or innocence: Public officials can unintentionally or intentionally create a public perception before a defendant is even formally charged or convicted.

• Law enforcement agencies, including a sheriff's office, typically have policies governing public statements about ongoing investigations. These policies are designed to balance the public's right to information with the defendant's right to a fair trial. A sheriff's public statements should be limited to factual, non-prejudicial information.