Federal Delegation Views Memphis Youth Initiatives

A delegation from the White House and several federal agencies is in Memphis this week to see how the city is mounting its war on youth violence. The group is looking for initiatives that can serve as national models. In conjunction with the visit, Memphis Mayor A C Wharton unveiled the city’s five-year plan of attack saying “We know where the problems are.” Efforts so far this year include a greater emphasis on collaboration, aggressive prosecution of gang leaders and repeat offenders, and asking area ministers and nonprofits to mentor at-risk teens. Read more about the initiatives in the Commercial Appeal.

Today's Opinions

Click on the category of your choice to view summaries of today’s opinions from that court, or other body. A link at the end of each case summary will let you download the full opinion in PDF format.

01 - TN Supreme Court
02 - TN Workers Comp Appeals
00 - TN Supreme Court - Rules
05 - TN Court of Appeals
09 - TN Court of Criminal Appeals
00 - TN Attorney General Opinions
00 - Judicial Ethics Opinions
00 - Formal Ethics Opinions - BPR
00 - TN Supreme Court - Disciplinary Orders









You can obtain full-text versions of the opinions two ways. We recommend that you download the Opinions to your computer and then open them from there. 1) Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This should give you the option to download the original document. If not, you may need to right-click on the URL to get the option to save the file to your computer.


TN Supreme Court

PORSHA PERKINS v. METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY

Court: TN Supreme Court

Attorneys:

Joseph Howell Johnston, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Porsha Perkins.

Saul Solomon, Director of Law, Department of Law of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County; J. Brooks Fox and Christopher M. Lackey, Assistant Metropolitan Attorneys, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County.

William B. Ryan and Bryce W. Ashby, Memphis, Tennessee; Justin S. Gilbert, Jackson, Tennessee; Jennifer B. Morton, Knoxville, Tennessee; and Wade B. Cowan and Douglas B. Janney, III, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Amicus Curiae, Tennessee Employment Lawyers Association.

Judge: CLARK

An employee of an agency of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County (“Metro”) was discharged after she filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a lawsuit against Metro alleging employment discrimination. The employee appealed her termination to the Metro Civil Service Commission and eventually settled the appeal, receiving backpay and other consideration in exchange for her agreement not to apply for or accept future employment with the agency that discharged her. The employee subsequently filed a complaint against Metro alleging, among other things, retaliatory discharge in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). Metro filed a motion seeking summary judgment. The trial court granted the motion, reasoning that the employee could not establish that her termination constituted an adverse employment action because she had accepted backpay and agreed not to be reinstated as part of the settlement of her Civil Service Commission appeal. The Court of Appeals affirmed. We conclude that the employee’s acceptance of the settlement does not preclude her from establishing that her termination constituted an adverse employment action for purposes of her federal retaliatory discharge claims. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals, vacate the judgment of the trial court granting Metro summary judgment, and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this decision.


TN Workers Comp Appeals

DANNY SMITH v. NESTLE WATERS NORTH AMERICA, INC. ET AL.

Court: TN Workers Comp Appeals

Attorneys:

Richard Lane Moore, Cookeville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Nestle Waters North America, Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Company.

B. Keith Williams and James R. Stocks, Lebanon, Tennessee, for the appellee, Danny Smith.

Judge: KOCH

This workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 51. After the employee sustained a compensable back injury, he filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits in the Chancery Court for Macon County. During the bench trial, the trial court admitted, over the employer’s objection, testimony from a physician selected through the Medical Impairment Registry (“MIR”) stating that the employee’s impairment arose from a work-related injury. The trial court thereafter awarded the employee permanent disability benefits based on a 6% impairment. We affirm the judgment.


STEPHEN VOWELL v. ST. THOMAS HOSPITAL ET AL.

Court: TN Workers Comp Appeals

Attorneys:

D. Randall Mantooth, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, St. Thomas Hospital.

Brian Dunigan, Goodlettsville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Stephen Vowell.

Judge: KOCH

This workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 51. An employee, who was rendered permanently and totally disabled following a compensable back injury, suffered severe depression after his employer informed him that his employment had been terminated. He filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking workers’ compensation benefits. Following a bench trial, the trial court concluded that the employee’s depression was compensable and, therefore, that the employee was entitled to receive medical benefits for treatment. The employer asserts on this appeal that the trial court erred by admitting the testimony of the employee’s evaluating psychiatrist and that the award of benefits is inconsistent with Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(15) (2008 & Supp. 2011). We affirm the judgment.


TN Court of Appeals

ANN LANGFORD ET AL. v. JEANE CLARK

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Gregory D. Smith and Travis N. Meeks, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jeane Clark.

Roger Alan Maness, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Ann Langford, Russell Adkins and John Adkins.

Judge: CLEMENT

In this conversion action, the trial court entered judgment against the defendant upon findings that she abused a confidential relationship, exerted undue influence, and improperly converted funds of her sister while she had dementia. The defendant appeals contending the action is time barred; she also contends the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence the deposition of her sister’s physician because she did not receive notice of the deposition. We have determined that the statute of limitations was tolled from the accrual of the claim of conversion until the death of the defendant’s sister due to the sister being of unsound mind and that the action was timely filed after her death. We also find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the deposition into evidence because the trial court afforded the defendant the opportunity to depose the physician but she failed to do so. Accordingly, we affirm.


PRECISION CASTINGS OF TENNESSEE, INC. v. H AND H MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Patrick D. Witherington, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, H and H Manufacturing Company, Inc.

Arthur E. McClellan, Gallatin, Tennessee, for the appellee, Precision Castings of Tennessee, Inc.

Judge: BENNETT

The defendant, a Pennsylvania corporation, challenges the trial court’s decision to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Based upon the defendant’s initiation of a contractual relationship with a Tennessee manufacturer and its entry into a contract providing that Tennessee law would control, we affirm the trial court’s decision to exercise jurisdiction in this dispute arising out of the contract.


DONALD ROBINSON v. MEMPHIS-SHELBY COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Darrell J. O’Neal, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Donald Robinson.

Jonathan C. Hancock and Whitney M. Harmon, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority.

Judge: FARMER

Petitioner, a police officer for the Memphis Airport Police Department (“MAPD”), was terminated by the Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority (“MSCAA”) for violating several of its policies and procedures. On appeal to this Court, Petitioner argues that MSCAA’s policies, and its application of those policies, violated his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Petitioner also argues that MSCAA violated his equal protection rights by applying its policies and procedures in a disparate fashion. After throughly reviewing the record, we find no basis for Petitioner’s claims. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.


IN RE ESTATE OF OMER STIDHAM

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Alexander M. Taylor and Briton S. Collins, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Karen A. Scott, Mary Jo White, Judy Wright, David Stidham, Suzanne E. Brooks, Rebecca Ball, and Terri Lane.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; William E. Young, Solicitor General; L. Vincent Williams, Deputy Attorney General; and Richard F. Clippard, Assistant Attorney General, General Civil Division, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Tennessee Bureau of TennCare.

Judge: MCCLARTY

The Bureau of TennCare filed a petition to appoint an administrator of Omer Stidham’s estate in order to file a claim against the estate for medical assistance rendered. The court appointed an administrator, and the Bureau of TennCare filed its claim. The administrator found that the estate was insolvent but moved the court to determine whether real property held in a revocable trust could be used to satisfy the debts of the estate. The heirs objected, arguing that the claim was untimely and that the property could not be reached because it was held in a revocable trust. The court authorized the use of the property to satisfy the debts of the estate, finding that the claim was not untimely and that the revocable trust was subject to claims against the estate. The heirs appeal. We affirm the decision of the trial court.


CANDICE M. VAN BIBBER (FORMERLY LANNIN-GLINSTRA) v. MARC A. GLINSTRA

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Marc A. Glinstra, Spring Hill, Tennessee, Pro Se.

Kelly Annette Greene, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee Candice M Van Bibber.

Judge: PER CURIAM

The father has appealed from an order entered on September 20, 2011, granting the mother’s motion to dismiss the father’s Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60 motion but reserving several other matters for a final hearing. Because the order appealed does not resolve all the claims between the parties, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment.


TN Court of Criminal Appeals

GARY R. BUNTON v. DAVID SEXTON, WARDEN AND STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Gary R. Bunton, pro se.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Clarence E. Lutz, Assistant Attorney General; and Anthony Wade Clark, District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: OGLE

The Petitioner, Gary R. Bunton, appeals the Johnson County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that he is being illegally restrained because his probation and community corrections sentences expired before revocation warrants were filed. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the habeas corpus court properly dismissed the petition.


STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RICKY LEE BURRIS

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

J. Liddell Kirk, Knoxville, Tennessee (on appeal); and Mack Garner, District Public Defender, Maryville, Tennessee (at trial), for the appellant, Ricky Lee Burris.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General & Reporter; Andrew C. Coulam, Assistant Attorney General; Mike Flynn, District Attorney General; and Kenlyn Foster, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: BIVINS

Ricky Lee Burris (“the Defendant”) pled guilty to one count of promoting the manufacture of methamphetamine, a Class D felony. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range II, multiple offender to six years in the Tennessee Department of Correction, suspended to supervised probation. After his second probation violation, the trial court revoked the Defendant’s probation and ordered him to serve his sentence in confinement. The Defendant has appealed. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.


STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DEMARICEO CHALMERS

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Juni Ganguli, (at trial) and Janene Oleaga (on appeal), Memphis, Tennessee, for the Defendant-Appellant, Demariceo Chalmers.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Sophia S. Lee, Senior Counsel; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General and Paul Goodman, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: MCMULLEN

Defendant-Appellant, Demariceo Chalmers, appeals as of right his convictions for attempt to commit aggravated robbery and first degree murder committed during the perpetration of an attempted aggravated robbery. He received a sentence of five years for the attempt to commit aggravated robbery to be served concurrently with a sentence of life imprisonment for the felony murder. In this appeal, the sole issue presented for our review is whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction of felony murder. Specifically, Chalmers contends that the State failed to prove felony murder because he abandoned his intent to commit the underlying felony prior to shooting and killing the victim. After reviewing the record and the applicable authorities, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.


STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES EDWARD CHURCH, JR.

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Andrew Jackson Dearing, III, Assistant Public Defender, Shelbyville, Tennessee, for the appellant, James Edward Church, Jr.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Meredith DeVault, Assistant Attorney General; Charles Crawford, District Attorney General; and Michael D. Randles, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: DANIEL

Appellant, James Edward Church, Jr., pled guilty to eleven counts of theft of property valued at less than $500, three counts of burglary, one count of resisting arrest, four counts of auto burglary, and one count of theft of property valued at more than $1,000 in Bedford County. The trial court was to determine the manner and length of the sentences at a sentencing hearing. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of approximately twelve years and six months. Appellant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in denying alternative sentencing. After a review of the record and the evidence, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.


OPHELIA L. LOMAX v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

George D. Norton, Jr., Ripley, Tennessee, for the appellant, Ophelia L. Lomax.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; J. Ross Dyer, Senior Counsel; Mike Dunavant, District Attorney General; and Julie K. Pillow, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: TIPTON

The Petitioner, Ophelia L. Lomax, appeals the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from her convictions for aggravated child abuse by causing serious bodily injury and aggravated child abuse by neglect or endangering a child. On appeal, she contends that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to (1) meet with her or discuss with her the nature of the charges and her potential defenses, (2) call an expert witness at the trial to contest the issue of serious bodily injury, and (3) raise an issue of prosecutorial misconduct on appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.


STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MARVIN CHRISTOPHER LONG, DESMOND SHELTON SPANN, and DONTILLUS WILLIAMS

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Shawn P. Sirgo, Nashville, Tennessee, (on appeal); and Matthew Mayo, Nashville, Tennessee, (at trial), for the appellant, Marvin Christopher Long. Brian T. Jackson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Desmond Shelton Spann. Dawn Deaner, District Public Defender; Emma Rae Tennent, Assistant Public Defender; Melissa Harrison, Assistant Public Defender; and Katie Weiss, Assistant Public Defender, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Dontillus Williams.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Benjamin A. Ball, Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. (Torry) Johnson, III, District Attorney General; John Zimmerman, Assistant District Attorney General; and Leticia Alexander, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: WOODALL

Defendants, Marvin Christopher Long, Desmond Shelton Spann, and Dontillus Williams, were indicted by the Davidson County Grand Jury for possession with intent to deliver 300 grams or more of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school and for conspiracy of the same offense, both Class A felonies. Following a jury trial, all three defendants were convicted as charged. Defendant Long was sentenced by the trial court as a career offender to 60 years’ incarceration for each conviction with his sentences to be served concurrently; Defendant Spann was sentenced as a multiple offender to 25 years’ incarceration for each conviction with his sentences to be served concurrently; and Defendant Williams was sentenced as a persistent offender to 40 years’ incarceration with his sentences to be served concurrently. Defendants appeal and assert the following: 1) Defendant Long challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and the trial court’s classification of him as a career offender; 2) Defendant Spann challenges the trial court’s jury verdict form regarding the schedule of the controlled substance, challenges the trial court’s instructions as to lesser-included offenses, and argues the trial court erred when it failed to instruct the jury regarding the weight of the controlled substance; and 3) Defendant Williams challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. After a careful review of the record before us, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.


STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JERELL REED

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

J. Thomas Caldwell, Ripley, Tennessee, for the Defendant-Appellant, Jerell Reed.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Clark B. Thornton, Assistant Attorney General; D. Michael Dunavant, District Attorney General; and Julie K. Pillow, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: MCMULLEN

Following the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s denial of his motion to dismiss, the Defendant-Appellant, Jerell Reed, entered guilty pleas to tampering with evidence, a Class C felony, and simple possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor, and purported to reserve a certified question of law regarding whether his attempt to dispose of less than onehalf ounce of marijuana constituted the felony offense of tampering with evidence. Because Reed failed to properly reserve the certified question, we dismiss the appeal.


JAMES PATRICK STOUT v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Bradley A. MacLean and Avram D. Frey, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, James Patrick Stout.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Sophia S. Lee, Senior Counsel; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and John W. Campbell, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: WEDEMEYER

The Petitioner, James Patrick Stout, was convicted of felony murder, especially aggravated kidnapping, and especially aggravated robbery. At the sentencing hearing for the felony murder conviction, the jury found three aggravating circumstances: (1) the defendant was previously convicted of one or more felonies whose statutory elements involved the use of violence to the person; (2) the murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution of the defendant or another; and (3) the murder was knowingly committed, solicited, directed, or aided by the defendant, while the defendant had a substantial role in committing or attempting to commit, or was fleeing after having a substantial role in committing or attempting to commit, any robbery or kidnapping. T.C.A. § 39-13-204(1)(2), (6) (Supp. 1995). The jury also found that the evidence of these aggravating circumstances outweighed evidence of the mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt and imposed a sentence of death for the Petitioner’s felony murder conviction. In a separate sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Petitioner to forty years for each of his convictions for especially aggravated robbery and especially aggravated kidnapping, to be served consecutively to one another and consecutively to the death sentence. On direct appeal, the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the Petitioner’s convictions and sentences. See State v. Stout, 46 S.W.3d 689 (Tenn. 2001). The Petitioner filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief, which was later amended by appointed counsel. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court entered an order in which it denied the Petitioner post-conviction relief from each of his three convictions and his sentences for the convictions of especially aggravated robbery and especially aggravated kidnapping. The post-conviction court’s order granted the Petitioner post-conviction relief from his sentence of death, ordering that the Petitioner have a new sentencing hearing. The Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying relief regarding the guilt phase of trial. After a thorough review of the record and applicable authorities, we affirm the postconviction court’s judgment.


TRAVIS JAY WOODS v. DAVID OSBORNE, WARDEN

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys:

Travis Jay Woods, pro se, Wartburg, Tennessee, appellant.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General & Reporter; John H. Bledsoe, Senior Counsel, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: BIVINS

Travis Jay Woods (“the Petitioner”), proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the indictment underlying his conviction of attempted first degree premeditated murder contains a fatal variance entitling him to habeas corpus relief. The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the Petitioner’s claim for relief. The Petitioner has appealed. We affirm the habeas corpus court’s ruling.


Hamilton PD Details Bias Accusations

The Hamilton County Public Defender’s Office is laying groundwork for possible appeals to a higher court if a local judge refuses to recuse himself from their cases. In court documents filed this week, Public Defender Ardena Garth and Assistant Public Defender Mary Ann Green maintain that Criminal Court Judge Barry Steelman “has created an environment in this Court of hostility and disrespect” toward their office. The public defenders claim the judge is biased against them based on a heated Aug. 14 hearing and a previously written opinion. The Times Free Press looks at the issue.


Federal Suit Filed Against McMinn County

Gussie Vann, a McMinn County man serving time for the rape of his 13-year-old niece, has filed suit against the county claiming that he was held for 48 hours without probable cause and held for 10 months without being allowed to see an attorney in relation to separate charges of murder and incest of his daughter. Those charges ultimately were dismissed by now District Attorney Steve Bebb, who was serving as a judge at the time. Vann was later convicted on the rape charges by a jury. Vann’s lawyer said both Bebb and the prosecutor in the case likely would be immune from civil suit while acting in their official capacity, but that the county could be held liable. The Times Free Press has more


Court: Time Stamp Overrides in Workers’ Comp Cases

The Tennessee Supreme Court has reiterated that workers’ compensation lawsuits can be filed only after the state has officially declared that a formal review could not resolve the differences between employer and worker, according to the Nashville Post. The case in question stemmed from an employee who filed a suit two minutes before a Department of Labor workers’ comp specialist documented an impasse between the parties. Despite the difference in the time stamped on the two documents, the chancery court allowed the case to go forward based on plaintiff’s attorneys affidavits that the suit was filed after they received a copy of the state’s report. The high court said that was not sufficient and called on the legislature to address “the undignified spectacle of literally racing to secure perceived procedural advantages” in workers’ comp cases, and while doing so to also "resolve the issue of nonsynchronous clocks.”


GOP Panel to Hear Vote Challenge

A special panel of state Republican Party executive committee members was to meet behind closed doors this morning to consider a challenge to a legislative primary race. The six-member subcommittee appointed by Chairman Chris Devaney was to evaluate the challenge brought by Shirley Curry, who wants to overturn her four-vote loss in the House District 71 primary. Adam Nickas, executive director of the party, declined to elaborate on the reason for the closed hearing or the basis for Curry’s challenge. The panel is expected to make recommendations to the full executive committee on Sept. 5. The News Sentinel reports


Supreme Court to Hold Docket Day at UT Law

University of Tennessee College of Law’s Moot Court Board will host the state Supreme Court on Sept. 4 for a series of special events. Chief Justice Gary Wade will open the program at noon, followed by a court session at 2 p.m., during which it will hear several cases, including a wills and estate case originating from the Knox County Chancery Court and an aggravated kidnapping case. Read more in the school’s weekly newsletter The Informant


University of Memphis Hosts Carville and Matalin

The University of Memphis will host political couple James Carville and Mary Matalin at its Political Perspectives Centennial Luncheon Sept. 14 at 11:30 a.m. in the ballroom of the University Center. The couple will discuss political issues facing the nation today, as well as the ongoing presidential election campaign. Otis Sanford, former managing editor of The Commercial Appeal and chair of the university’s Excellence in Economics/Managerial Journalism program will moderate the discussion. Tickets, which may be purchased online, are $30 per person and include admission and parking. For more information call (901) 678-5582.


Retired Knoxville Lawyer Dies

Knoxville lawyer Ann Nigro died yesterday (Aug. 22) at the age of 93. Nigro graduated from the University of Tennessee College of Law in 1943 and was the first woman to receive the Moot Court Medal. After college she practiced law for two years at Southern and Southern and then opened a firm with her husband Judge Joseph J. Nigro. The family will receive friends from noon to 2 p.m. on Saturday at Berry Funeral Home, 3704 Chapman Hwy., Knoxville 37920. Funeral services will follow at 2 p.m. Memorials may be made to Colonial Heights United Methodist Church, 6321 Chapman Hwy., Knoxville 37920 or to Grassy Valley Baptist Church, 10637 Kingston Pike, Knoxville 37922. Read more about her life


Buckles Family Names Memorials

The family of Memphis lawyer Earl C. Buckles, 69, who died Monday (Aug. 20), have announced that memorial donations may be made to Methodist Hospice Residence, 6416 Quince Rd., Memphis 38119, or to a charity of one’s choice. Services for Buckles were held this morning. Read more about his life


Murfreesboro Lawyer Reinstated

Murfreesboro lawyer Derek A. Artrip was reinstated to the practice of law on Aug. 16 subject to several conditions. The Supreme Court directed him to comply with Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, Section 18; engage a practice monitor; continue group therapy sessions with the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program; and pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding. Artrip was suspended in July for failing to respond to a complaint of misconduct. He petitioned for reinstatement after submitting a response. Download the BPR notice


 
 

Questions, comments: Email us at TBAToday@tnbar.org

About this publication: Today's News is a compilation of digests of news reports of interest to Tennessee lawyers compiled by TBA staff, links to digested press releases, and occasional stories about the TBA and other activities written by the TBA staff or members. Statements or opinions herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Tennessee Bar Association, its officers, board or staff.


© Copyright 2012 Tennessee Bar Association