The Community Legal Center (CLC), which is celebrating its 30th anniversary this year, has two events planned this weekend. On Saturday morning, the CLC and the Memphis City Council will co-host a free estate planning legal clinic. The event will take place from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. CDT at the Bert Ferguson Park & Community Center, 8505 Trinity Rd., Cordova 38018. View a flyer for the clinic. Then on Saturday evening, the center will hold its annual fundraising event “Celebrating Everyday People,” set for 7 p.m. at the STAX Recording Museum. Tickets are available here.

A U.S. judicial panel has endorsed a proposed rule that would, for the first time, govern federal mass torts cases. The rule, unanimously approved by the U.S. Judicial Conference's Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, aims to give judges overseeing federal multidistrict litigation (MDLs) guidance on how to conduct early case management when they are tasked with overseeing hundreds or thousands of lawsuits. Data shows that MDLs have grown significantly in recent years and comprised 71.3% of the federal civil caseload at the end of last fiscal year. The rule now goes to the Judicial Conference's Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Meeting for further approval, Reuters reports.

State Rep. Mary Littleton, R-Dickson, chair of the House Children and Family Affairs Subcommittee, and Sen. Ed Jackson, R-Jackson, chair of the Senate Calendar Committee, are pushing legislation to create a Juvenile Justice Review Commission under the Department of Children’s Services (DCS) and the Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth (TCCY) to study the state’s juvenile justice system and make legislative recommendations to the General Assembly. The bill, HB1103/SB0609, is pending in both the House and Senate Finance committees. The Post Local News has more on the proposal.

Some Nashville defense attorneys are challenging the competency of longtime Criminal Court Judge Cheryl Blackburn nearly three years after she suffered a stroke, the Nashville Banner reports. The motions, most of which have been filed under seal, reportedly question Blackburn’s ability to oversee serious criminal cases. One motion has been filed publicly. It came this week in a felony assault case. Blackburn has served on the court since 1996. She previously worked at the Davidson County District Attorney’s Office and the Tennessee Department of Mental Health. She holds a master’s degree in clinical psychology and law degree.

The American Bar Association (ABA) has launched two new task forces aimed at ensuring independence in the defense and prosecution of criminal cases. The Task Force for Public Defense Independence has been created in conjunction with the ABA Criminal Justice Section and Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defense, as well as the National Association for Public Defense. See the full list of task force and advisory board members. The ABA also has created the Task Force for Prosecutorial Independence. Members of this group include Vanderbilt University Law School Criminal Justice Program Director Christopher Slobogin. The task force will be assisted by an advisory board composed of national leaders, including former U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, now dean of the Belmont University College of Law, and former Tennessee and federal judge Bernice B. Donald. See the full list of advisory board members. The groups are tasked with preserving and strengthening defense and prosecutorial independence, respectively, and enhancing public understanding of how that independence is critical to the integrity of the criminal justice system.

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. A corporate defendant in a civil lawsuit moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s action based on a contractual forum-selection clause even though the plaintiff was not a signatory to that contract. The district court applied the so-called “closely related” doctrine, found that the plaintiff was sufficiently closely related to the contract for the court to apply and enforce the forum-selection clause against that non-signatory plaintiff, and dismissed the action. The plaintiff appeals, arguing that the district court applied the wrong law, and correspondingly the wrong analytical approach, to determine the contract’s applicability. Ultimately, we agree and for the reasons that follow, we REVERSE and REMAND.

This is an appeal from an order striking a demand for a jury trial. Because the order does not resolve all of the claims between the parties, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment.

This appeal concerns standing and subject matter jurisdiction. Brett and Ceree Houghton (“Plaintiffs”) were the sole shareholders of Great Wakes Boating, Inc. (“GWB”), a Malibu Boats, LLC (“Defendant”) dealership. Defendant ended its dealership agreement with Plaintiffs, and GWB failed. Plaintiffs sued Defendant in the Circuit Court for Loudon County (“the Trial Court”) for intentional misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, and promissory fraud. The jury awarded Plaintiffs $900,000 in damages for loss of equity in certain real property owned by GWB. Defendant filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and/or for a new trial. At a hearing on the motion, Defendant argued for the first time that Plaintiffs lacked standing. The Trial Court agreed and entered an order dismissing Plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, deeming the other issues in Defendant’s motion moot. Plaintiffs appeal. We hold that Defendant’s challenge to Plaintiffs’ standing went to the merits and did not implicate subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant’s challenge to Plaintiffs’ standing is waived as untimely raised. We reverse the judgment of the Trial Court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

This appeal arises out of a property dispute. Although we agree with the Appellant that the trial court erred in pointing to the “good faith” of one of the Appellees when denying the Appellant any damages for Appellee’s construction of a fence on the Appellant’s land, and therefore remand this case for the entry of a judgment awarding the Appellant nominal damages for trespass, we conclude that the remainder of the Appellant’s grievances, and requests for additional relief, are waived due to insufficient briefing.

This is an appeal of the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to the employer. The employee alleged an injury to his low back while working as a mechanic. The employer denied the claim based on improper notice and a preexisting condition. Following an expedited hearing, the trial court determined the employee did not offer sufficient evidence to indicate a likelihood of proving at trial he suffered an injury arising primarily from his employment and denied benefits. That order was not appealed. The court then issued a scheduling order, after which the employer filed a motion for summary judgment. The employee did not file a response to the motion or appear for the hearing, and the trial court granted the motion for summary judgment. The employee then filed a motion to set aside the order dismissing his case, citing several reasons for his failure to respond or appear, and he filed a response to the motion for summary judgment. Thereafter, the court set aside its previous order and entered an order denying the motion for summary judgment based on the employee’s response. The employer then filed another motion for summary judgment, and the employee again did not respond to the motion or appear for the hearing. The court granted summary judgment to the employer and dismissed the case. The employee has appealed. Upon careful consideration of the record, we vacate the order and remand the case.