A proposed class action lawsuit accuses Washington, D.C., based law firm Wiley Rein of failing to detect a cyberattack, which gave hackers access to sensitive consumer data that was stolen and sold on the dark web. According to Bloomberg Law, hackers gained access to the firm’s systems for eight months as early as July 2024, but Wiley Rein did not discover the breach until June 2025 and waited until March 2026 to notify victims. Florida resident Derrick Burkett is suing the firm for negligence, breach of third-party contract, unjust enrichment and invasion of privacy on behalf of himself and similarly situated individuals. Burkett says he has had at least 19 fraudulent charges on his MetLife estate account due to the breach.

The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar recently voted to allow law schools to count graduates who complete alternative pathways to licensure toward the minimum graduation rate needed for accreditation. The ABA Journal reports that the council’s Standards Committee recommended modernizing Standard 316. Council member Mary Lu Bilek said it was important to align the standard with what is happening across the country, where some states — including Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota and Utah — have or are considering alternatives to the bar exam. The move follows a 2025 report by the Committee on Legal Education and Admissions Reform, which found that innovative pathways such as supervised practice could help address access to justice and practice readiness.

The TBA International Law Section's annual forum — set for tomorrow in TBA's newly renovated CLE classroom — will provide an overview of the trade and investment landscape as it concerns Tennessee in 2026 and beyond. Programming will focus on Tennessee's foreign direct investment, global health perspectives and partnerships, international financing, global sales and supply chains, and more. Participants will have the opportunity for direct interactive discussions with speakers, and the chance to network, learn about best practices and chart a path to increase capacity for internationalization. Get more information and register here.

Tennessee is home to hundreds of breathtaking waterfalls, many tucked throughout the scenic Cumberland Plateau and the Appalachian Mountains, where winding trails and lush landscapes lead to unforgettable views. Beyond the beauty, these outdoor escapes offer a natural way to stay active and fit while enjoying fresh air, peaceful surroundings and clarity of mind — whether you’re hiking solo for quiet reflection or making memories with others along the trail. During the summer months, waterfall hikes also offer a refreshing alternative to indoor workouts, as shaded trails, cool river gorges and mist from cascading falls can feel noticeably cooler than open sunny areas. Many spots even feature swimming holes perfect for cooling off after the climb. So get out, work out and cool down while experiencing some of Tennessee’s most scenic natural wonders. For more information see Tennessee Waterfalls That Are Worth the Hike. For more information on accessible waterfalls in middle Tennessee look at Waterfalls for All.

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. The year was 1997, and George Bernard (“Bernie”) Worrell, Jr., stood on stage at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, Parliament-Funkadelic’s Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Acceptance Speech | 1997 Induction, YouTube (June 15, 2020), https://youtu.be/EmOmNz5Ak-g. He was there for his induction as part of the pioneering funk group Parliament-Funkadelic (“P-Funk”). Although Worrell left P- Funk in the early 1980s, he played a central role in its rise, working as a composer, arranger, “keyboardist of astonishing ability,” and “one of a writing team of three . . . behind ‘hit after hit in the heyday of P-Funk.’” R. 133-3 (Exner Report ¶ 24) (Page ID #3568) (citation modified). Smiling to the side during Worrell’s remarks was the band’s charismatic leader, George Clinton, decked out in a gilt robe and frizzy white wig, sunglasses resting on his forehead. Beneath the surface of this celebration, which honored one of the 1970s’ most groundbreaking and enduringly influential musical acts, lay a long-running and unresolved dispute. Clinton’s and Worrell’s musical synergies never translated into a smooth or simple legal relationship. Quite the opposite. Their decade of collaboration is littered with informal and contested agreements, including a purported 1976 contract (“1976 Agreement”) granting Thang, Inc. (Clinton’s company) full ownership of sound recordings that Worrell worked on, in exchange for royalties. On top of that, Clinton and Thang were allegedly not in the habit of paying Worrell, under the 1976 Agreement or otherwise. As Worrell’s wife Judie put it: Clinton “was busy hauling in the funky dollar bills and NOT sharing with those who made the MUSIC possible.” R. 134-12 (Judie Worrell Blog at 5) (Page ID #4199). Worrell died in 2016. In 2019, his estate (the “Estate,” which is the plaintiff here) sued Thang in New York state court for breach of contract, a claim that Thang successfully defended on the ground that Worrell lacked a countersigned copy of the 1976 Agreement. In 2022, the Estate changed tack and sued in federal court, seeking a declaration of its joint ownership of recordings Worrell created with P-Funk and, in turn, an accounting of royalties due. Clinton and Thang moved for summary judgment, arguing that the statute of limitations on the Estate’s copyright claims had long since run. The district court agreed and entered judgment in the defendants’ favor. This is not a contract case, as the Estate’s contract claims under the 1976 Agreement were decided in the New York court. Notwithstanding the 1976 Agreement’s invalidity, which is now res judicata, the Agreement remains the focus of the Estate’s statute-of-limitations argument. Worrell, the Estate argues, justifiably understood that the Agreement, not federal copyright law, governed his recordings with P-Funk. Accordingly, the Estate insists, Worrell’s ownership rights under copyright law were not plainly and expressly repudiated until 2020 when Clinton and Thang denied the Agreement’s validity, at which point the copyright-ownership claims accrued. We agree with the Estate that genuine disputes of material fact preclude judgment as a matter of law. Viewing the case’s highly unusual facts in the light most favorable to the Estate, part of Worrell’s copyright-ownership claim is timely. We therefore REVERSE the district court’s judgment and REMAND for further proceedings.

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. In Michigan, counties follow a years-long process when foreclosing on properties to satisfy property tax liens. In the third and final year of this process, a court enters a foreclosure judgment against the property. Then, the property owner must pay off the tax lien before the judgment’s deadline or else the county receives title to the property. Once the county has title, the former owner loses all rights to the property except the right to the foreclosure sale’s proceeds. But the county takes a cut, which includes the tax deficiency, interest, fees, a 5% sales commission, and the county’s expenses. This case involves the interaction between that process and the United States Bankruptcy Code. Carrie Ann Reinhardt owned a house in Bay County, Michigan. In 2019, she didn’t pay her property taxes, so Bay County initiated foreclosure. When a Michigan court entered a foreclosure judgment against the property three years later, Reinhardt owed the county $5,845 and the property’s fair market value was roughly $75,000. Bay County received title to Reinhardt’s property. And shortly after, Reinhardt filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy and then filed a complaint seeking to avoid (undo) the transfer of title as preferential under the Code. The bankruptcy court granted the Bay County Treasurer’s summary-judgment motion and denied Reinhardt’s. The district court affirmed. But because we find that Reinhardt established that the transfer was preferential under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b)(4) and § 547(b)(5) as a matter of law, we reverse.

SUTTON, Chief Judge. The Internal Revenue Service, it’s often said, requires taxpayers to “turn square corners.” Rock Island, Ark. & La. R.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143 (1920). Complex statutes, book-length regulations, and too-many-part tests are an unfortunate reality of those turns. Yet the Internal Revenue Code, for all of the challenges of identifying taxable and non-taxable events before people act, still strives to make our nation’s tax system “accessible to everyone with the time and patience to pore over its provisions.” Summa Holdings, Inc. v. Comm’r, 848 F.3d 779, 781 (6th Cir. 2017). Congress and the citizens it represents prefer seen corners to unseen ones. In today’s case, the government seeks to impose a $39 million judgment, including interest and penalties, on Flight Options, a fractional-share jet company, for failing to collect a tax on fixed fees it charged to pay for the overhead and management of its clients’ private jets. The Internal Revenue Code imposes a 7.5% excise tax on the “amount paid for” domestic “transportation by air,” 26 U.S.C. §§ 4261(a), 4262(a)(1), what the statute called a “ticket tax” at all relevant times of this dispute, id. § 4261(e)(1)(C), (e)(5) (2012). The Code imposes the tax on the ticket buyer. But the Code makes the ticket seller liable for any tax it fails to collect on behalf of the government. Flight Options determined that the tax applies only to usage charges for each flight a client takes, not to fixed fees it charges its clients for overhead and management of its fractional jet business. The district court disagreed. It held that Flight Options should have collected taxes on the fixed fee charges as well and that, having failed to collect them, must pay the balance, with interest and penalties to boot. Because the ticket tax applies only to usage charges for each flight and not fixed charges for overhead and management costs, we reverse.

A Madison County jury convicted the defendant, Jason O. Miller, of aggravated assault and domestic assault, for which he received an effective sentence of eight years in confinement to be served at 100%. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for aggravated assault. The State concedes that the evidence is insufficient to support the defendant’s conviction. Upon review, we conclude there was insufficient evidence to sustain the defendant’s conviction for aggravated assault. However, as there was sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction of assault, we reverse the judgment for aggravated assault, modify the conviction to assault, and remand for a new sentencing hearing and entry of an amended judgment.

The appellant, AA/AAA Bonding Company, appeals its suspension from writing bonds in the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District due to its failure to comply with the applicable statutes. Based upon the record, the parties’ briefs, and oral argument, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

A Macon County jury convicted the Defendant, Keith Douglas Garrett, of one count of unlawful photography and one count of observation without consent. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days and to register as a sexual offender. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the prosecution was void due to alleged defects in the arrest process and that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements he made to investigators under Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967). He also challenges the admission of digital evidence extracted from his cell phone and alleges that the State failed to disclose an additional forensic extraction report. In addition, he contends that the State engaged in an improper closing argument. Finally, he challenges the trial court’s sentencing determinations, including the denial of judicial diversion and alternative sentencing and the requirement that he register as a sexual offender. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court.