A list of those who passed the February 2025 Tennessee bar exam is now available. Those who meet all licensing requirements will be sworn in at events across the state in early June. The Tennessee Supreme Court will meet on June 2 at 2 p.m. CDT in Nashville; on June 3 at 9 a.m. in Memphis and 1:30 p.m. CDT in Jackson; on June 4 at 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. CDT for virtual ceremonies; and on June 9 at 9 a.m. EDT in Knoxville. Watch for statistics from this spring's exam coming soon. Download the list in pdf format.

Nashville attorney and former TBA president Jacqueline Dixon was recognized as the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program's (TLAP) Volunteer of the Year at the Annual Camp TLAP held April 4 -6 at Montgomery Bell State Park in Dickson. She currently serves as board chair of the Tennessee Bar Foundation, vice-chair of the TLAP Commission and chair of the TLAP Foundation. She is a past president of the Tennessee Lawyers Association for Women. Dixon also currently gives back to the community by serving on the boards of two non-profit organizations: A Step Ahead Foundation of Middle Tennessee, a provider of free long-acting reversible birth control, where she is a founding board member and past board president; and First Steps Inc., a provider of education and care for special needs children alongside their typically developing peers. Dixon has been instrumental in advancing TLAP as a top program and providing financial assistance via the TLAP Foundation to those in need of mental health or substance use disorder services through TLAP according to the organization.

The TBA Creditors Practice Section Executive Council will hold a section social event at Noble's Central, 2292 Rosa L Parks Blvd., Nashville 37228 on April 30 from 5:30-8 p.m. CDT. Section members are invited to join colleagues for drinks, appetizers and opportunities to network with the executive council and fellow section members. Get more information and RSVP here.

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. Lucky Land Management owns property in Ohio. EOG Resources has drilling rights to the oil and gas under that property. The two couldn’t agree on whether EOG’s rights to drill included the right to drill from Lucky Land’s surface out to adjacent properties as well. So EOG sued. EOG then asked the district court to grant a preliminary injunction letting the company access the land to cut down trees and start constructing drills. The district court did so, finding that EOG would probably succeed on the merits. We disagree. Lucky Land has the better reading of oil-and-gas law; generally speaking, your leased drilling rights don’t let you use the land’s surface to drill into neighboring lands, too. What’s more, EOG wouldn’t have suffered any irreparable injury if it had to wait while the litigation progressed. And preliminary injunctions aren’t shortcuts to the merits—by preventing irreparable injuries, they simply preserve the court’s ability to issue meaningful final relief at the end of the case. So they aren’t appropriate when there’s no prospect of irreparable harm. Because neither the merits nor the equitable considerations favored EOG, we reverse.

Petitioner, Jason Steven Molthan, appeals from the trial court’s summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence related to his misdemeanor convictions for stalking and harassment, for which he received consecutive sentences of eleven months and twenty- nine days. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion without the appointment of counsel and a hearing; that the trial court improperly imposed consecutive sentencing by finding that his history of criminal activity was extensive; and that he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in his direct appeal. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm.

James Anthony Andrews, Petitioner, pleaded guilty in this case to two counts of aggravated assault. At the same hearing, Petitioner pleaded guilty to additional charges in another case. As part of his plea agreement, Petitioner agreed to concurrent eight-year sentences for the aggravated assault charges to run consecutively to a two-year sentence for the charges in the other case—for a total effective sentence of ten years—with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. The trial court accepted Petitioner’s guilty pleas, and Petitioner applied for probation, which the State opposed. The trial court denied Petitioner’s request for probation, requiring him to serve his ten-year sentence in incarceration. Petitioner subsequently petitioned for post-conviction relief, asserting that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate the case and that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily made. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied Petitioner’s amended petition. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Defendant, Jonathan Ellerbasch, Alias, pleaded guilty in the Knox County Criminal Court to aggravated assault with serious bodily injury. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of three years to be served in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion by denying an alternative sentence and in ordering a sentence of confinement. Following a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The plaintiff filed this lawsuit against her joint employers, asserting sexual harassment/ hostile work environment, retaliation, and other related claims. The employers filed a motion to compel arbitration. The plaintiff opposed the motion and invoked the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021, 9 U.S.C. §§ 401- -402. The trial court deemed the Act applicable and denied the motion to compel arbitration. The employers appeal. We affirm.

A husband and wife divorced a little over two years after marrying. On appeal, the wife asserts the trial court erred when it classified five real properties as the husband’s separate property. The wife also takes issue with the court’s division of attorney’s fees and requests her fees on appeal. We find the court failed to make adequate findings related to its division of attorney’s fees. Therefore, we vacate the portion of the order relating to fees and expenses and remand the matter for the court to make additional findings. We affirm the trial court in all other aspects and decline to award the wife her attorney’s fees incurred on appeal.

In this divorce with no children, the trial court declared the parties divorced and referred the property issues and requests for attorney’s fees to a special master. The special master recommended an equal division of the marital estate and that each party pay their own attorney’s fees. The wife objected to these recommendations. After a hearing, the trial court adopted the special master’s findings and recommendations, with one small exception. On appeal, the wife challenges the division of the marital estate and the failure to award attorney’s fees. We affirm.