The TBA YLD will hold an Essential Documents clinic for the Blount County's Sheriff's Department on March 27 from 9 a.m.-5 p.m. EST. The clinic will be held in collaboration with the McKinnish Law Group and Spicer Rudstrom PLLC at the Blount County Justice Center located at E. Lamar Alexander Parkway, Maryville 37804. Contact Joey Maus or TBA YLD District Representative Alexandra Jones for more information or to volunteer. 

BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judge. Cortez Blake was convicted by a jury of aiding and abetting kidnapping. On appeal, Blake challenges his conviction and sentence on five grounds, spanning pre-trial motions, evidentiary objections, sufficiency of the evidence, and conditions of supervised release. We affirm the district court on four of the five grounds, but we remand this matter for the district court to resolve the discrepancy between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written judgment.

READLER, Circuit Judge. Brandie Nicole Appleton pleaded guilty to possessing controlled substances with intent to distribute and possessing stolen ammunition. Although the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommended 41 to 51 months of imprisonment given Appleton’s offense level and criminal history, the district court sentenced Appleton to five years of probation. Appleton’s good fortune, however, would not hold. Less than two months later, she was arrested for possessing an unprescribed controlled substance in violation of the terms of her probation. That offense caused the district court to revoke Appleton’s probation and resentence her to a term of 44 months of imprisonment. On appeal, Appleton claims that the district court erred in imposing her sentence of imprisonment. Because Appleton waived her right to appeal any sentence for her offense of conviction within or below the Guidelines range, we must dismiss her appeal.

Petitioner, Betty Sparks, appeals the denial of her post-conviction petition alleging that the post-conviction court erred in finding that she received the effective assistance of counsel at trial. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

This is an action to modify a permanent parenting plan. Mother appeals the trial court’s order finding her in civil contempt, modifying the parties’ parenting plan, and awarding attorney’s fees to Father. She also argues that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Father’s initial petition to establish a parenting plan. We have determined that the trial court properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction over this matter. We affirm the trial court’s finding that Mother’s failure to abide by the parenting plan constituted a material change of circumstance. However, Father failed to carry his burden of proof to demonstrate that modification of the 2021 parenting plan to designate Father as primary residential parent is in the child’s best interest. We therefore reverse the trial court’s judgment granting Father’s petition to modify. We affirm the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to Father and remand for recalculation of the parties’ child support obligations. Father’s request for attorney’s fees on appeal is denied.

The notice of appeal in this case was not timely filed. Therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

This case arises out of allegations that Appellees misappropriated Appellant’s inheritance funds for their own use. Appellant also alleges elder abuse based on the conversion as well as a physical altercation between Appellant and an Appellee. Appellees allege that Appellant gifted them the inheritance funds. In its findings of fact and conclusions of law, the trial court concluded that: (1) because Appellant engaged in bad faith, the doctrine of unclean hands applied and barred her full recovery; (2) Appellees converted and misappropriated a portion of Appellant’s inheritance funds; (3) Appellees did not commit elder abuse; and (4) Appellant intended a partial gift of the inheritance funds to Appellees. Because the trial court erred when it sua sponte raised the affirmative defenses of bad faith and unclean hands, we reverse the trial court’s application of these doctrines to reduce the judgment awarded to Appellant. We also conclude that the trial court failed to consider the elements of elder abuse, the elements of a properly executed gift, and failed to make appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning the same. As such, we vacate the trial court’s order as to Appellant’s elder abuse claim and Appellees’ gift claim. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment awarded to Appellant. The remainder of the trial court’s order is affirmed. The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. Appellant’s request for appellate attorney’s fees is pretermitted.

The U.S. Senate has approved the nomination of Brian Charles Lea as the newest district court judge for the Western District of Tennessee. The vote was 50-46 according to Reuters. Lea, a deputy associate attorney general with the Department of Justice and a former clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, was nominated by President Donald Trump in November 2025. The Senate also today approved Justin Olson as a judge in the Southern District of Indiana. The votes bring to 33 the number of judicial nominees the Senate has confirmed during Trump's second term.

In this appeal, the employer asserts the trial court erred by awarding certain medical benefits after conducting a motion hearing rather than an expedited hearing, arguing that it did not receive proper notice of the nature of the hearing. The employer also argues that the court erred in its assessment and characterization of the medical evidence and that the employer’s referral to the compliance program was procedurally improper, unsupported by evidence, and resulted in additional prejudice. In response, the employee asserts that an expedited hearing was unnecessary and that the court did not err in ordering medical benefits at a motion hearing. Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we vacate the trial court’s order and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Several state agencies have released information to help residents deal with the aftermath of Winter Storm Fern. The Tennessee Attorney General’s Office is urging consumers to use caution when selecting a business to provide tree trimming or removal services to avoid being scammed. In addition, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Department of Commerce and Insurance Commissioner Carter Lawrence have released a joint statement regarding insurance claims following the storm. The pair encourage residents to review the online resources available and file a complaint about any storm-related insurance claims believed to be wrongfully denied. Finally, the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency is encouraging residents to report property damage caused by the storm to help it demonstrate the need for a federal major disaster declaration.