CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. In all its many forms, music is a powerful influence. One of music’s great gifts is its knack for soothing the mind. Think of the way listening to your favorite song takes you to a place where, at least temporarily, life’s frustrations are quickly set aside. Music’s perhaps most endearing quality is its ability to unite. Whether it be a song, an artist, or an ensemble, each has its own way of joining those of different backgrounds in a shared passion. See generally Raymond MacDonald, The Social Functions of Music, in Routledge International Handbook of Music Psychology in Education and Community 5–21 (Andrea Creech, Donald A. Hodges & Susan Hallam eds., 2021). In the words of one enduring performer, “music seems to be the common denomination that brings us all together. Music cuts through all boundaries and goes right to the soul.” Id. at 5 (quoting Willie Nelson). Today’s case, however, offers at least one example of how music has the power to divide—even a family: a copyright suit in which heirs to a music composer’s fortune squabble over copyright assignments and associated royalties. Travilyn and Tammy Livingston (mother and daughter) each claim a right to royalties tied to certain songs authored by Jay Livingston (Travilyn’s father and Tammy’s grandfather). Between 1984 and 2000, Jay assigned his copyright interests in several songs to a music publishing company. See 17 U.S.C. § 201(d). In recent years, Travilyn invoked her statutory right to “terminat[e]” those copyright grants. Id. § 203(a). To do so, she filed termination notices with the United States Copyright Office, seeking to undo her father’s assignments to the company and recapture his interests in the copyrights for herself. Travilyn’s daughter Tammy, a beneficiary of her grandfather’s assignments, sued her mother, challenging the terminations. The district court dismissed Tammy’s complaint, holding that it failed to state a claim. We affirm.

The Petitioner, Gabriel Enriques Turcios, was convicted of first degree murder and was sentenced to serve life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Thereafter, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief, asserting that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at his trial. More specifically, he alleged that his trial counsel (1) failed to timely and adequately raise an insanity defense; (2) failed to challenge the aggravating circumstance for sentencing under Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-204(i)(5); and (3) failed to seek suppression of messages exchanged between the Petitioner and the victim. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief, and the Petitioner appealed. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

A number of lawyers have been reinstated after being suspended for administrative violations. Two lawyers have been reinstated after completing required continuing legal education hours (one in 2023 and one in 2024). Two lawyers have been reinstated after paying the annual registration fee to the Board of Professional Responsibility (one in 2010 and one in 2024). One lawyer was reinstated after paying the 2024 professional privilege tax. One lawyer was reinstated after being suspended in 2016 for not paying the inactive fee. And one lawyer was reinstated after being suspended in 2011 for failure to meet IOLTA requirements. The TBA has records of all administrative suspensions and reinstatements going back to 2005. See all lists here.

Brandon Bassett, Defendant, was indicted for and convicted of five counts of aggravated sexual battery. On appeal he argues that the State’s failure to elect an offense in Count 5 resulted in a jury verdict that was not unanimous and requires reversal. Defendant also argues the trial court abused its discretion in ordering consecutive sentencing by failing to place findings on the record to show that the overall length of the sentence comported with the purposes and principles of sentencing. Because we determine that the proof at trial necessitated an election on Count 5, we reverse the conviction in Count 5 and remand for a new trial. However, we determine the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Defendant to an effective sentence of thirty years. In all other respects, the judgments are affirmed. Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

This is an accelerated interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion for recusal of the trial judge. After carefully reviewing the limited record provided by the parties, we affirm the decision of the trial court denying the motion.

This appeal arises out of a local planning commission’s approval of a development plan application. The Plaintiff sought to appeal the planning commission’s approval of the application to the local board of zoning appeals; however, a local zoning ordinance permitted the plan applicant to opt out of the appeal before the board of zoning appeals, which he did. The plaintiff then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the circuit court, challenging the planning commission’s approval of the application and the dismissal of his appeal by the board of zoning appeals. The plaintiff claimed that the opt-out provision violates his constitutional right; thus, by applying the opt-out provision, the board of zoning appeals acted illegally. The circuit court dismissed the petition, holding that the plaintiff impermissibly combined an original action with a petition for certiorari review. The circuit court also dismissed the plaintiff’s claim regarding the planning commission’s actions because the plaintiff did not sufficiently verify his petition. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court.

June 30, 2025 - July 4, 2025.

Following a riot and dozens of indictments, calls are growing to remove CoreCivic as the private operator of the Trousdale Turner Correctional Center in Hartsville, with state Rep. Michael Hale, R-Smithville, and District Attorney General Jason Lawson urging the Tennessee Department of Correction to take over operations, Tennessee Lookout reports. A grand jury recently returned 41 indictments tied to incidents at the prison, including 12 connected to a riot in which inmates stabbed a staffer and seized control of an inner yard. Lawson said more charges are expected and that crimes at the prison have burdened the county’s court system while failing to improve inmate safety. Recent legislative and regulatory actions have sought to address high death rates at facilities run by private companies. CoreCivic said it is reviewing its policies in an effort to prevent further violence.

Lawyers for a disabled death row inmate are asking the state to ensure that his implanted heart defibrillator is disabled before his execution to prevent the possibility of it causing a prolonged and painful death, according to The Tennessean. Byron Black — one of the state’s longest serving death row inmates — set to be executed on Aug. 5 for the 1987 murders of a Nashville woman and her two daughters. Black’s lawyers on June 30 filed a request for a preliminary injunction asking the Tennessee Department of Corrections to ensure that his implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is deactivated before his execution. A hearing on the matter is set for July 14 in Davidson County Chancery Court. Black’s lawyers have been battling to save his life, arguing he is ineligible for capital punishment due to his intellectual disability, dementia and severe brain damage. They also have asked the Tennessee Supreme Court to weigh in and reverse a lower court’s decision that declined to decide whether he is ineligible for the death penalty.

TBA member benefit partner and legal practice management company Clio announced last week that it will acquire legal AI and research company vLex in a deal valued at $1 billion. British private equity firm Oakley Capital agreed to sell Barcelona-founded vLex to Clio, a Vancouver, Canada-based company, which called the deal a “new era for AI-powered legal technology.” vLex’s research and drafting AI tool, known as Vincent, will revolutionize Clio’s current offerings, according to a news release from the company. “The transformative union of legal research, practice management and cutting-edge AI marks a category shift in legal technology that converges the business and practice of law,” Clio said. In April 2023, vLex and another TBA member benefit partner, Fastcase, merged to form vLex Fastcase.