TBA Young Lawyers Division (YLD) Past President Billy Leslie, Secretary Ross Smith and TBA House of Delegates Member Princess Rogers visited the Nashville School of Law (NSL) this week to speak with students about the benefits of their free membership with the TBA, including the Diversity Leadership Institute (DLI) and mentoring programs. They encouraged students to get involved with the TBA early by volunteering at pro bono clinics and attending CLE programs. NSL 3L student Diane Tress, a member of the 2024 DLI class, also was on hand to encourage her peers to apply for that program. See photos from the event.

A Marion County jury convicted Landon Allen Turner, Defendant, of reckless homicide and aggravated child abuse for the death of Z.H.,1 Defendant’s girlfriend’s two-year-old son. He argues on appeal that: (1) the juvenile court erred in transferring his case to circuit court; (2) the State violated its Brady obligations by failing to provide defense counsel with a copy of Defendant’s statements prior to the juvenile transfer hearing; (3) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (4) his conviction for aggravated child abuse should be barred under the doctrine of “mutually exclusive verdicts”; and (5) his sentence is excessive. After review, we affirm the judgments.

Petitioner, David Anthony Avery, filed a motion pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1 claiming that his sentences were illegal because his criminal case was a civil matter, that the United States District Court had original jurisdiction over all civil cases, and that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to impose the sentences. We determine that the motion failed to state a colorable claim and affirm summary dismissal of the motion by the trial court.

This post-divorce action concerns the distribution of proceeds from the sale of the parties’ former marital residence as specified in their marital dissolution agreement. The husband claimed a right under the MDA to, inter alia, one-half of the net proceeds, but the wife asserted that the MDA limited the husband’s equity interest to $40,000. The parties also disputed who was liable for income taxes, including interest and penalties, incurred and accruing after 2019, when the parties entered the MDA. Each party also asserted claims and entitlements to various credits and/or offsets resulting from the delay in the sale of the marital residence. The trial court held that the MDA limited the husband’s interest to $40,000. The court assessed $29,368.52 in post-divorce income taxes, including penalties and interest, against the husband. The court also ordered him to pay $20,543.10 for the wife’s attorney’s fees per the MDA’s fee-shifting provision. But the court granted the husband’s request for reimbursement for the cost of repairs to the property and awarded the husband credit for one-half of the utilities that he paid pending the sale of the property. The husband appeals, raising several issues. We respectfully disagree with the trial court’s finding that the MDA limited the husband’s equity interest to $40,000. We also conclude that the MDA obligated Husband to pay for all utilities and other expenses pending the sale of the property. For this reason, we reverse the trial court’s finding that Husband was entitled to a credit of one–half of those payments. Thus, we vacate the monetary awards that were based, in part, on these decisions, and remand with instructions to recalculate the parties’ respective entitlements to “the net proceeds.” We affirm the trial court in all other respects. We also find that the wife has a right to recover her reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees and expenses incurred on appeal under § 15 of the MDA and remand with instructions for the trial court to make the appropriate award.

In response to a petition alleging the violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 2-19- 116, a statute that prescribes a criminal penalty and that this Court has held does not provide for a private right of action, the trial court entered an injunction. The trial court thereafter found that the appellant was in criminal contempt of the injunction and sentenced him to ten days in the county jail. The appellant appeals, arguing, among other things, that the order that he was held in contempt of was not lawful. For the reasons stated herein, we hold that the contempt judgment should be reversed.

This appeal arises from a dispute between a partnership and its limited partners concerning the payment of attorney’s fees under the parties’ limited liability agreement. The trial court held that the attorney’s fees were payable from the proceeds of the sale of the partnership’s property, and the limited partners appeal. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Henry C. Leventis, U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee, has announced he will resign effective Oct. 4. During his two-year tenure, Leventis led the office's efforts in public safety, civil rights and combating health care fraud. Notable achievements, according to a press release from the office, included prosecuting international gangs, seizing significant amounts of drugs and intervening in a lawsuit challenging Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care. Leventis will return to private practice after his departure. “I am eternally grateful to President Biden, Attorney General Garland, and Senators Blackburn and Hagerty for the opportunity to lead the United States Attorney’s Office and to work alongside so many talented and committed public servants,” Leventis said in the release.

TikTok and the U.S. government today began oral arguments in a federal court case that could determine the future of the popular social media platform in the United States, WSMV 4 reports. Attorneys for the two sides appeared before a panel of three judges at a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. The case centers around a law enacted in April that requires TikTok's China-based parent company, ByteDance, to divest its U.S. operations by mid-January or face a ban. The social media platform sued after the law's enactment. The government argues that TikTok poses a national security risk due to its data collection practices and susceptibility to Chinese government influence. TikTok, however, contends that the law violates the First Amendment and is akin to authoritarian censorship. The company claims it has made significant efforts to address the government's concerns, including a proposed agreement and investments in security measures, according to the report.

Tennessee Justice for Our Neighbors (TNJFON) seeks to raise $50,000 at its annual Oye Vecino LIVE fundraiser on Sept. 19. The event, which features a panel discussion, music and food, aims to support the organization's mission of providing free or low-cost immigration legal services. This year's goal is higher due to increased operational costs and the absence of previous fundraising events. The organization already has raised over $32,000 toward its goal. The event will take place at the Fourth Story Theater at the West End United Methodist Church in Nashville. More information and the link to register are available online.

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles is contesting the FBI's seizure of his cell phone and Gmail account as part of an investigation into alleged campaign finance discrepancies. Ogles confirmed the seizure in a social media post last month. According to Axios Nashville, Ogles claims these devices contain legislative materials that should be protected under federal law. In a recent court filing, he requests permission to review and remove documents related to that work. His attorneys also argue that the Justice Department should not have access to these communications. With regard to the broader investigation, Ogles has maintained that the alleged reporting discrepancies were based on honest mistakes.