Alexander Ivy pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute and being a felon in possession of a firearm. At sentencing, the district court enhanced Ivy’s Sentencing Guidelines range upon finding that Ivy’s prior conviction for aggravated robbery under Ohio law was a “crime of violence” under the Guidelines. We hold that a conviction for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon under Ohio Revised Code § 2911.01(A)(1), without further information that the aggravated-robbery conviction is predicated on a particular underlying theft offense, is not a crime of violence. We thus vacate Ivy’s sentence and remand to the district court for resentencing.

This appeal involves a decision by the Town of Louisville Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) that was upheld on review by the Blount County Circuit Court (“trial court”). At its May 5, 2020 hearing, the BZA granted appellee William Mattison’s request for a variance to allow him to construct an accessory, non-attached garage on his improved real property, which structure would purportedly exceed the height limit set by town ordinance. The appellants, Frank and Tina Reed, who own property adjacent to Mattison’s property and who had opposed Mattison’s request for a variance, filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the trial court on July 5, 2022, seeking review of the BZA’s decision. The trial court conducted hearings on the Reeds’ petition in January and February 2023. On Feb. 27, 2023, the trial court entered a final order affirming the BZA’s decision to grant a variance to Mattison. The trial court found that there was a rational basis for the BZA’s decision, which was supported by material evidence, and that the BZA had acted within its scope of authority and discretion. The Reeds timely appealed. Determining that there existed no material evidence of any particular characteristic of the real property warranting the grant of a variance, we reverse the trial court’s judgment affirming the BZA’s decision and vacate the BZA’s grant of a variance to Mattison as illegal and outside the BZA’s authority.

This appeal concerns juror misconduct. Chayce Collier (“Chayce”), a minor, by and through his parent and next friend, Kendall Collier (“Plaintiff”), sued Periclis Roussis M.D. (“Dr. Roussis”), Fort Sanders Perinatal Center and Fort Sanders Regional Medical Center (“the Hospital”) (“Defendants,” collectively) in the Circuit Court for Knox County (“the Trial Court”) alleging health care liability in Chayce’s delivery. A major issue at trial was whether Dr. Roussis fell below the standard of care by failing to administer epinephrine to Plaintiff when she had an anaphylactic reaction during labor. The jury found for Defendants. However, it emerged that a juror had gone home and looked at the warning on an epipen which said that epinephrine should only be used when the potential benefit justifies the potential risk to the fetus. The juror shared this information with the rest of the jury. Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which the trial court first granted and then denied. Plaintiff appeals. Under Tenn. R. Evid. 606(b), jurors may not be asked what effect, if any, that extraneous information had on them. Instead, courts look to the extraneous information itself to determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that it altered the verdict. We hold that there is a reasonable possibility that the extraneous information shared with the jury in this case altered the verdict, and Defendants failed to rebut the presumption of prejudice. The trial court applied an incorrect legal standard and thereby abused its discretion in denying Plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. We reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The father and stepmother of Macee M. filed a petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights on three grounds. The trial court found that one ground had been proven, abandonment for failure to support, and that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in Macee’s best interest. Based on these findings, the mother’s parental rights were terminated. The mother appeals. We affirm the termination of her parental rights.

This appeal arises from a petition to terminate the parental rights of a mother and a father to their son. The trial court found that three grounds for termination existed as to the parents: (1) substantial noncompliance with a permanency plan; (2) persistent conditions; and (3) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody. The trial court also found that the termination was in the best interest of the child. The mother and the father appeal. We reverse the trial court’s finding that clear and convincing evidence established the ground of persistent conditions. However, we affirm its findings that the remaining grounds were proven as to both parents and that termination was in the best interest of the child.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has reversed the decision of a Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility hearing panel, which has recommended suspending the law license of Nashville attorney Brian Manookian. The court instead permanently disbarred Manookian. The court held that, after Manookian’s continuing, serious violations of multiple Rules of Professional Conduct, even after receiving several sanctions and suspensions, disbarment was the only appropriate action. Read the BPR press release on the disbarment.

Michael Regier, general counsel and secretary at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), will retire at the end of the academic year, and Douglas Mefford, managing counsel in the Office of Legal Affairs, will succeed him effective July 1, according to a press release from VUMC. Mefford joined VUMC in 2013 and has led initiatives to restructure the LifeFlight air ambulance program and Vanderbilt Imaging Services. He has also supported the Medical Center’s regional hospital acquisitions in Lebanon, Shelbyville and Tullahoma, and helped negotiate VUMC’s minority interest in Tennova Healthcare – Clarksville.

Memphis Area Legal Services Inc. (MALS) has announced that Loyce Lambert Ryan has joined the organization as interim executive director following the departure of Cindy Ettingoff. Lambert Ryan served as judge for the Shelby County General Sessions Criminal Court Division XV from 2000 to 2022. She was appointed in 2004 by then-Gov. Phil Bredesen to the Governor’s Task Force on Sentencing Guidelines, and in 2015 by the Tennessee Supreme Court to serve on the Indigent Defense Task Force. Additionally, MALS has appointed Gortria C. Banks as chief operating officer. She joined MALS in August 2023 after serving as associate executive director of the Community Legal Center. Read more in a press release from the organization.

A group of women suing Johnson City and multiple police officers is now accusing city officials of victim-shaming, pushing back against public statements suggesting they deserve blame for being victims of an alleged serial rapist, the Tennessee Lookout reports. Johnson City Manager Cathy Ball has said the victims could be, to some degree, “at fault” for their assaults because they “consumed and partook of illegal drugs.” The lawsuit alleges mishandling of the investigation into local businessman, Sean Williams, and claims officers with the Johnson City Police Department took hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash from Williams while refusing to take meaningful steps to "stop his sexually predatory behavior," News Channel 9 reported in December. “Survivors deserve to be treated with respect,” one Jane Doe said. Ball said in a statement that “protecting victims and the community is the top priority of the Johnson City Police Department."

Make plans now to attend a May 2 webcast to hear from a representative of the Tennessee Department of Revenue, who will provide an introduction to the state franchise and excise tax. The event will begin at noon CDT and provide one general CLE credit. More information coming soon!