The Tennessee Supreme Court Historical Society will host a reception on Oct. 4 from 5:30-7 p.m CDT to honor the current, outgoing and new members of the court. Retiring Justice Sharon Lee and incoming Justice Dwight Tarwater specifically will be honored. The event will take place at the Nashville office of Holland & Knight, 511 Union St., Ste. 2700, Nashville 37219. For more information contact Stacie Beishuizen. The society was founded in 1995 to ensure the preservation and accessibility of the records of the court.

Retired Coffee County Circuit Court Judge Vanessa Jackson was recently named by the Tennessee Supreme Court as the first female senior judge. The Tullahoma News reports that Jackson is one of seven senior judges, each having held an elected judicial position to qualify for the appointment. A senior judge presides over cases when judges have recused themselves, have an extended illness or face an extra heavy caseload.

The Tennessee Supreme Court issued opinions in two cases today asserting that the plaintiffs in those cases could proceed with their vicarious liability claims, which were timely filed, against the defendant hospitals, even though the statute of limitations would have barred any claims against the hospitals’ agents. The court concluded that, in the circumstances of these cases, the Health Care Liability Act abrogates a common-law rule known as the operation-of-law exception. The justices filed several separate opinions in the cases, which are available here: Ultsch opinion authored by Justice Sarah Campbell, Ultsch opinion authored by Justice Sharon Lee, Ultsch opinion authored by Justice Jeff Bivins, Gardner opinion authored by Justice Sarah Campbell, Gardner opinion authored by Justice Sharon Lee and Gardner opinion authored by Justice Jeff Bivins.

The Tennessee Supreme Court today held that the criminal gang-enhancement statute is worded broadly and does not require the state to specify a criminal defendant’s gang subset in an indictment. The statute also does not require the indictment to set forth that the defendant is in the same gang subset as the individuals whose criminal activity establishes the gang’s “pattern of criminal gang activity.” Read more about the case from the Administrative Office of the Courts or read the opinion.

The Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued an opinion that Supreme Court Rule 13 — which provides the procedure for administering funds for assisting indigent litigants in capital cases — was constitutionally applied in the state’s case against Jessie Dotson. Following conviction for premeditated first-degree murder, Dotson raised claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and requested funds to hire experts to assist him. The post-conviction court authorized the funds, but the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Tennessee Supreme Court chief justice reduced the amount in some instances and denied approval in others. After the Court of Criminal Appeals upheld those changes, Dotson appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing, among other things, that he was denied a full and fair post-conviction hearing. The high court disagreed, ruling that the application of Rule 13 to Dotson’s case was constitutional, that he was not denied due process, and that he was afforded a full and fair post-conviction hearing. Read more about the case.

The Tennessee Supreme Court today affirmed a one-year suspension for Sevier County attorney James Ralph Hickman Jr., but increased the length of time to be spent on active suspension. The Board of Professional Responsibility (BPR) had recommended that Hickman serve at least 90 days on active suspension with the remainder on probation. It also imposed several conditions of probation, including that Hickman be under the supervision of a practice monitor and complete 15 additional hours of CLE in estate management. Finally, it required that any violation of the conditions result in automatic reversion to active suspension. The court changed the BPR’s recommendation in two ways: it increased the length of active suspension to six months and removed the requirement that a violation of probation automatically reverts his case to active suspension. Hickman’s conduct was determined to violate Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5(a), 3.3(a)(1) and RPC 8.4(c). Read more in a press release from court or the opinion.

Changes to the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure and Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure, approved by the General Assembly in April, took effect July 1. The changes were originally proposed by the Tennessee Supreme Court in August 2022 based on recommendations from the Advisory Commission on the Rules of Practice & Procedure. The court originally included amendments to Rule 41 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure but after a comment period decided to send that section back to the commission for further consideration.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that persons who lose the right to vote in Tennessee because of a criminal conviction in another state must comply with requirements set forth in two different Tennessee statutes, both of which address voting rights, in order to regain their right to vote. Justice Jeff Bivins, writing for the majority, ruled that individuals seeking to reinstate their right to vote must comply with both Tenn. Code. Ann. section 2-19-143(3), which requires the state to re-enfranchise persons convicted of out-of-state infamous crimes as soon as said persons are “pardoned or restored to the rights of citizenship by the governor or other appropriate authority of such other state," as well as the additional requirements set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. section 40-29-202, which requires that persons convicted of infamous crimes pay outstanding court costs, restitution and child support obligations before they can be re-enfranchised. Justice Sharon Lee dissented, stating that the plaintiff had been granted clemency, which restored his voting rights, so the requirement under section 40-29-202 does not apply because the plaintiff had no need to have his voting rights restored.

For the ninth year in a row, the Tennessee Supreme Court is recognizing Attorneys for Justice, honoring all attorneys who provide at least 50 hours of service annually. The recognition program was created to encourage more attorneys and law offices to provide pro bono services to those who cannot afford legal costs, with a goal of increasing statewide pro bono participation to 50%. See the list of current Attorneys for Justice on the Supreme Court’s website.

The Tennessee Supreme Court today issued an order adopting a new Court of Appeals Rule 17. The rule deals with the signing of notices of appeal, applications for permission to appeal, applications for extraordinary appeal, petitions for recusal appeal, briefs, motions, representations to the court, and sanctions. The amendment takes effect immediately.