The Governor’s Council for Judicial Appointments is now accepting applications to fill a vacancy on the Tennessee Court of Appeals following the retirement of Judge Kenny Armstrong on Feb. 9, 2026. Qualified applicants must be licensed attorneys who are at least 30 years of age, have been residents of the state for five years and reside in the Western Grand Division of Tennessee. Applicants must complete the Governor’s Council for Judicial Appointments’ application, and submit it to the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) by noon CST on Nov. 5. The council will meet on Dec. 10 at 9 a.m. CST in the chambers of the Jackson City Council, located at 109 E. Main St., STE 107, Jackson 38301. Please submit questions to AOC Assistant General Counsel Laura Blount at 615-741-2687. Complete application instructions can be found on the AOC's website. 

Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier continues to evaluate whether or not to join a compact with the Trump administration that would give the university priority access to federal funding, but multiple campus groups have weighed in on the issue, Tennessee Lookout reports. The faculty senate voted last week to recommend the university reject the deal, as did the Vanderbilt graduate student union and the undergraduate student government. In related news, MIT rejected the same deal on Friday, according to the Nashville Banner.

A female wrestler at Ravenwood High School in Brentwood has filed a Title IX lawsuit against the Williamson County Board of Education, alleging that the girls' wrestling team was treated as an afterthought to the boys' team and was provided substandard support and opportunities as compared to the school’s other sports teams. Read more about the suit from the Nashville Banner.

TBA General, Solo & Small Firm Section members recently hosted two networking events in Johnson City and Nashville. On Oct. 2, members gathered at Wellington's in Johnson City, followed by a lively evening at Monday Night Brewing in Nashville on Oct. 8. TBA members — both current section participants and those interested in learning more — came together to connect, share experiences and enjoy each other’s company. Thanks to everyone who attended and helped make these events a great success! 

HELENE N. WHITE, Circuit Judge. The government appeals the reduction of Defendants’ sentences, from life imprisonment to terms of years, under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194. Defendants were initially sentenced for a conspiracy involving both powder and crack cocaine and several homicides. The government argues that the First Step Act did not authorize the district court to reduce Defendants’ sentences for the homicide convictions because the homicide convictions are not “covered offenses” under § 404 of the Act and were not part of sentencing packages, and that the reduced sentences for all the convictions are substantively unreasonable in any event. Because we conclude that the First Step Act allows resentencing on some, but not all, non-covered offenses, specifically only those that are part of a sentencing package, we VACATE the sentences imposed on resentencing and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. Two middle schoolers in Michigan wore sweatshirts emblazoned with the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” to school. Based on the commonly understood meaning of the slogan, the school administrators determined that the sweatshirts were inappropriate for the school environment. They asked the students to remove the sweatshirts, and fearing punishment, the students complied. But they still wanted to wear the sweatshirts at school to express their disapproval of then-President Joe Biden’s administration and its policies. So, through their mother, the students sued the school district and several school administrators, alleging that the school deprived them of their First Amendment rights. The district court sided with the school district, concluding that the school could reasonably prohibit the sweatshirts since they were vulgar speech. Because the school reasonably understood the slogan “Let’s Go Brandon” to be vulgar, we affirm.

The Defendant, Aaron Joseph Couvertier, entered an open plea to one count of aggravated statutory rape, a Class D felony. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the Defendant’s request for judicial diversion and imposed a two-year sentence to be served in the Tennessee Department of Correction at 100 percent service. The Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in denying judicial diversion. After review, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

Gloria Juanita Milton (“Milton”) hired attorney Thomas J. Tabor, Jr. (“Tabor”) to defend her as an appellee in Milton v. Powell. After successfully defending her in the appeal, a disagreement arose between Tabor and Milton over the attorney’s fees she owed him. Tabor filed a complaint in the General Sessions Court for Claiborne County (“the General Sessions Court”), which found that Milton owed Tabor $10,030 in unpaid attorney’s fees. Milton appealed to the Circuit Court for Claiborne County (“the Trial Court”), which came to a different conclusion than the General Sessions Court. The Trial Court determined that any remaining amount owed by Milton above and beyond what she already had paid was excessive and unreasonable. Tabor appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

This appeal arises from the sale of certain real property by a custodian for the benefit of two minor children pursuant to the Tennessee Uniform Transfers to Minors Act. The custodian sold the property without having it appraised, hiring a real estate agent, or listing the property for sale on the open market. Rather, the custodian reviewed an appraisal published by the county’s property assessor and then sold the property for a price slightly exceeding the listed value. The children’s mother filed a lawsuit on their behalf, alleging that the custodian breached his fiduciary duty of care. The trial court determined that the mother failed to prove that allegations and dismissed the case. The mother appeals. We affirm.

This is an accelerated interlocutory appeal as of right. The petitioner seeks review of the trial court’s denial of his motion for recusal. Discerning no error upon our review of the petition for recusal appeal, we affirm.