The Tennessee Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual Violence has long provided legal help to immigrant victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking, assisting them in applying for special visas that are set aside for those who cooperate with police. As of June 30, however, the group’s immigrant legal clinic closed after the Tennessee Office of Criminal Justice Programs ended immigrant legal aid grants. Jennifer Escue, the coalition’s CEO, said the cut leaves already vulnerable victims with few legal alternatives. “They’re not going to get help, they’re not going to report and it’s one more thing their abusers can hold over them” she tells the Tennessee Lookout. Another Tennessee nonprofit, Justice for Our Neighbors, is trying to fill the gap but reports turning away a high volume of immigrant victims seeking help.

A Shelby County jury convicted the defendant, Ladarrin Ceazer, of second-degree murder for which he received a sentence of twenty-five years with the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant contends the trial court erred in sentencing him to the maximum within-range sentence. Upon our review of the record, the applicable law, and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Defendant, Samantha Louise Bledsoe, was indicted by the Sullivan County Grand Jury for one count of driving under the influence ("DUI"), one count of DUI per se, one count of driving on a revoked license, and one count of DUI sixth offense. At the close of the State's proof, the trial court granted Defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal as to the charge of driving on a revoked license. A jury found Defendant guilty of the alternate DUI counts, and after a bifurcated proceeding, the DUI sixth offense count. The trial court merged the other offenses into the DUI sixth offense count and imposed an agreed upon four-year sentence. Defendant appeals her conviction and challenges the sufficiency of the evidence of her identity as the driver of the vehicle. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the criminal court.

The appellant has filed a late notice of appeal together with a request to waive the late filing. Because the thirty-day time limit for filing a notice of appeal with the appellate court clerk is jurisdictional and cannot be waived, we deny the request to waive the late filing and dismiss the appeal.

Thirty-one days after entry of the trial court’s final order, Appellants filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Rules 59.02 and 59.04 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. Appellants subsequently filed a motion for relief pursuant to Rule 60.02, requesting that the court consider their untimely Rule 59 Motion due to their attorney’s excusable neglect or mistake. The basis for the alleged excusable neglect was Appellants’ counsel’s admitted calendaring error, which resulted in counsel filing the Rule 59 Motion one day late. Following a hearing on the matter, the trial court denied Appellants’ Rule 60.02 Motion, determining that the circumstances did not constitute excusable neglect. Upon review of the parties’ briefs and record on appeal, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The mother of the minor child at issue appeals the termination of her parental rights. The trial court found that four grounds for termination had been proven and that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in the minor child’s best interest. Although we vacate the finding that the ground of persistence of conditions was established, we affirm the finding that three grounds for termination have been proven and that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the minor child’s best interest. Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

This matter involves an ongoing dispute between a landlord and a tenant in Pulaski, Tennessee. Following a detainer action in General Sessions Court over unpaid rent, the tenant, representing himself, filed the present case against the landlord, alleging numerous causes of action. The trial court dismissed all the tenant’s claims against the landlord, finding that the tenant erred in failing to join his claims in the original detainer action. The tenant, still representing himself on appeal, challenged the trial court’s dismissal of his claims. Due to the deficiencies in his brief, we conclude that he has waived consideration of any issues on appeal and hereby dismiss the appeal.

In this interlocutory appeal, the employer challenges the trial court’s award of medical and temporary disability benefits. The employee, a commercial truck driver, claimed that the cab of his truck shook violently over a ninety-minute period as he attempted to park at a truck stop, causing an injury to his cervical spine. The employer initially accepted the claim as compensable based on the authorized physician’s opinion and provided medical and temporary disability benefits. The employer then retained an orthopedist to perform a medical records review, and that physician concluded the employee had reached maximum medical improvement with respect to his alleged work-related accident. Consequently, the employer ceased paying temporary disability benefits. The employer also reviewed data from the truck’s vehicle monitoring systems, and, because those reports did not reflect the alleged event as described by the employee, it denied any further benefits. The treating physician eventually recommended cervical spine surgery and opined the need for surgery was caused primarily by the alleged work accident, but the employer had, by that point, denied the claim. The employer then asked the orthopedist it previously retained for the medical records review to perform a medical examination of the employee, and he opined that even if the incident occurred as described by the employee, it was less than fifty percent the cause of the need for the recommended surgery. After an expedited hearing, the trial court found the employee was likely to prevail at trial in showing that his cervical spine condition arose primarily out of the event he had described. It also determined the authorized treating physician offered the most probable explanation of the primary cause of the need for surgery, and it awarded additional medical and temporary disability benefits. The employer has appealed. Upon careful consideration of the record and the arguments of counsel, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand the case.

The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) has appealed a judge's decision that struck down an executive order targeting law firm Susman Godfrey, Reuters reports. DOJ asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to reverse the decision from U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan. The executive order, issued on April 9, suspended security clearances and restricted access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work for lawyers at the firm. Susman said it would "fight the administration's unwarranted appeal and continue to defend the rights of … clients and our colleagues."

TBA General, Solo & Small Firm Section members are excited to host networking events in Johnson City and Nashville! Join section members on Oct. 2 at Wellington's in Johnson City from 4:30-6:30 p.m. EDT. We'll be back at it Oct. 8 at Monday Night Brewing in Nashville from 5-7 p.m. CDT. TBA section members as well as any TBA member interested in learning more about the section and networking with other solos and small firm attorneys are invited to attend. Make plans now to join colleagues at these networking events. Please RSVP if possible, as it helps us track the expected number of guests. We hope to see you there!

CLICK HERE to RSVP for the Johnson City event on Oct. 2

CLICK HERE to RSVP for the Nashville event on Oct. 8

Thank you Crystal Cole with CRC Legal Group for sponsoring the Nashville event!