Do you dread completing your required ethics hours each year? We have good news! All of TBA’s Year End CLE packages include dual hours to meet ethics requirements. Choose from tried and true programs like the Ethics Homeshow and Essential Presentation Skills for Attorneys; fun and engaging programs like From Bach to Beyonce and ChatGPT, Siri, and Alexa are Out to Get You; or our new in-person program TBA Magical Mystery CLE: Legal Ethics & The Beatles in downtown Nashville on Dec. 14. With 50 ethics courses to choose from, we have you covered.

Attorney volunteers are needed for the Tennessee Free Legal Answers Clinic to be held at Belmont Law School, 1901 15th Ave. S., Nashville, 37212 on Dec. 11 from 11 a.m.- 12:30 p.m. CST. Currently 2-3 volunteers are needed. For more information please contact Ginny Blake.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of her Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02 motion. In 2003, the trial court entered judgment against Appellant and in favor of Appellee/law firm. In her role as Appellee’s bookkeeper, Appellant committed fraud, misrepresentation, conversion, and negligence in stealing funds from the Appellee’s operating account. The 2003 order of judgment also contains a separate judgment for conversion against Appellant’s then-husband, who is not a party to this appeal. However, there is no finding of joint-and-several liability in the 2003 order, and Appellant did not appeal the order. After receiving an extension of its judgment, in July 2021, Appellee filed a garnishment against Appellant, claiming that the outstanding balance on the judgment, with interest, was in excess of $1,000,000.00. After the garnishment was filed, Appellant sought a finding that she should receive a credit against the judgment based on the payment made by her then-husband in satisfaction of the 2003 judgment entered against him. Appellant also sought credit for monies paid by Appellee’s bank under a private settlement. The bank was never sued. The trial court denied the credits on its finding that the bank and Appellant’s then-husband were neither joint tortfeasors, nor jointly and severally liable. The trial court noted that any relief from the 2003 judgment for mistake in the omission of joint-and-several language was time-barred as Appellant failed to bring her Rule 60.02 motion, under subsection (1) for mistake, within the one-year time period contemplated in the rule. Having determined that there was no joint-and-several liability, the trial court determined that Appellant was not entitled to credits for either her then-husband’s payment or the bank’s payment and denied relief under Rule 60.02(4) for satisfaction of the judgment. Appellant appeals. Discerning no error, we affirm.

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Bradley Peterson sued Kristina Johnson and Bruce McPheron1 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Johnson and McPheron violated his procedural-due-process rights. Peterson alleges that he had a property interest in his status as an emeritus professor at the Ohio State University (“Ohio State”) and that Johnson and McPheron deprived him of that status without adequate process. The district court dismissed the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), finding that Peterson’s emeritus status was not a constitutionally protected property interest. Peterson now appeals. For the reasons explained below, we AFFIRM the district court.

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Rudolph Betancourt’s disability made it difficult for him to access a shopping plaza. Invoking the Americans with Disabilities Act, Betancourt filed suit against the plaza’s owner. The owner admitted fault as to some alleged violations and undertook remedial efforts. Later, the district court entered a final judgment directing the owner to correct the remaining violations. The court also awarded Betancourt $12,000 in attorney’s fees and costs. Betancourt, however, believes he is entitled to more fees and costs. Finding no abuse of discretion by the district court, we affirm.

Memphis Area Legal Services (MALS) will hold its monthly clinic at the Benjamin Hooks Library this Saturday from 10 a.m. to noon CST. The library is located at 3030 Poplar Ave., Memphis 38111. Lawyers and non-lawyers are needed for this high-volume clinic. Questions commonly raised by clients include issues involving housing, family, consumer and employment law. Come volunteer for a portion of the event or the full time. Sign up here to help.

Legal Aid of Middle Tennessee & the Cumberlands will host four clinics this week. Tomorrow, the group will hold a clinic at the Nashville Public Library from 4-6 p.m. On Thursday, it will hold an expungement clinic in Columbia from 1-4 p.m. On Friday, it will hold a legal aid clinic in Columbia from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. And on Saturday, it will hold its McHugh Clinic in Nashville from 9:30-11:30 a.m. All times central. Get additional information on the LAS website or volunteer to help at any of these clinics by contacting Kendra Cheek, 615-780-7131.

A group of Catholic nuns has sued the board of Smith & Wesson in an attempt to force the gunmaker to abandon the manufacture and marketing of its assault-style rifles used in U.S. mass shootings, reports Reuters. The nuns filed the lawsuit in their role as Smith & Wesson shareholders, in what is known as a derivative lawsuit, the first against a gun manufacturing board, according to the nuns' attorney. The lawsuit, filed in Nevada state court, alleges Smith & Wesson's directors exposed the company to significant liability by intentionally violating federal, state and local laws.

The Defendant, George Wells, pleaded guilty to reckless homicide with an agreed-upon sentencing range of two to five years. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the Defendant’s request for diversion or any other form of alternative sentencing and imposed a five-year incarcerative sentence. The Defendant appeals the trial court’s sentencing decision, challenging the length, manner of service, and denial of judicial diversion. After review, we determine that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to consider and weigh all of the relevant judicial diversion factors and by utilizing an improper factor. Based upon our de novo review of the judicial diversion factors, the trial court’s judgment is reversed, and the Defendant’s request for judicial diversion is granted. The matter is remanded to the trial court for the imposition of a term and the conditions of judicial diversion.

Nashville attorneys April Nemer and Jake Nemer have announced the opening of the family law practice Nemer LLP. The attorneys previously practiced with Lindsey Amonette Nemer + Glassford PLLC. The new practice includes divorce and family law litigation, probate and estate administration and mediation. April Nemer attended Belmont University and New England School of Law. Jake Nemer attended Rhodes College and Loyola University New Orleans College of Law. Both are Nashville natives.