In October, Tennessee lawyers are joining colleagues across the country to increase meaningful access to justice and commitment to pro bono work. Now in its 15th year, Tennessee’s statewide Celebrate Pro Bono Month initiative brings together legal services providers with bar associations, law schools, law firms and individual volunteers to offer free services to those unable to afford a lawyer. The month of October is an opportunity to focus attention on the significant need for pro bono services as well as a time to celebrate the outstanding work of those in the legal community who volunteer their services throughout the year. Events, including in-person and virtual opportunities to volunteer, will be promoted in TBA Today and via social media. The American Bar Association's National Pro Bono Celebration will be held the week of Oct. 22, with the theme "Voices of Democracy: Ensuring Justice for All." If you have information about an upcoming pro bono event, please share it with TBA at tbatoday@tnbar.org.

The Tennessee Supreme Court Boot Camp is tomorrow. Produced by Donald Capparella of Dodson Parker Behm & Capparella and Edmund Sauer of the Tennessee Supreme Court, this unique opportunity allows you to view oral arguments in real cases, followed by a panel discussion with the justices. 

After the justices' panel, there will be a provided networking lunch, discussion with advocates who participated in oral arguments and an ethics presentation on preservation of record. Attendees can earn up to three hours of general and one dual hour of CLE credit.

Don’t miss this chance to meet with and learn from your Supreme Court justices and connect with colleagues from across the state. Appellate Practice Section members receive a discounted rate. Learn more and register here.

Legal Aid of East Tennessee (LAET) is hosting several events to recognize pro bono contributions by lawyers in the community, including many members of the TBA YLD. The nights will consist of awards, good food and drinks, silent auctions and more! The Chattanooga night will be at the Chattanooga Whiskey Event Hall at 5 p.m. EDT on Oct. 26. The Knoxville night will be at The Standard at 5 p.m. EDT on Nov. 2. Learn more or get tickets here.

Join the Department of Revenue on Oct. 4 at 8:30 a.m. CDT for a free webinar designed specifically for new businesses. In this webinar, participants will learn about state obligations for new businesses and other resources that may help them. Topics covered include tax registration, sales and use tax, business tax, franchise and excise taxes, and how to get help from the Department of Revenue as well as other state tax agencies. Register here.

Shelby County Probate Court Division 1 Judge Kathleen Gomes today ruled to end the conservatorship over retired NFL player Michael Oher and allowed Oher's case against conservators Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy to continue. Oher filed a petition in Shelby County Probate Court on Aug. 14 asking to terminate the conservatorship, which he claimed the family duped him into entering. The Daily Memphian reports that in addition to ending the conservatorship, Oher is seeking a full accounting of funds he believes the Tuohys made during the conservatorship, including money for “The Blind Side” movie, which he says he never received. He also has requested an unspecified amount.

A Madison County Grand Jury indicted the defendant, Cornell Poe, for driving on a revoked license, unlawful use of a license plate, improper registration, and violation of the financial responsibility law. The defendant filed a suppression motion, arguing the lack of signage on the one-way street deprived him of due process. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, and the State appealed, asserting the defendant’s seizure was supported by probable cause. Upon our review of the record, arguments of the parties, and pertinent authorities, we agree with the State, reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for further proceedings.

RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Pest-control company Terminix faced a “super termite” crisis from 2018 to 2019 that predominately affected homeowners in the Mobile, Alabama area. Teamsters Local 237 Welfare Fund (the Fund) alleges that Terminix’s parent company, ServiceMaster Global Holdings, Inc. (ServiceMaster), its then-CEO Nikhil Varty, and its then-CFO Anthony DiLucente (collectively, the Defendants), violated the federal securities laws through a series of misrepresentations and omissions that understated ServiceMaster’s liability for the resulting termite-damage claims, concealed the risk of such claims from investors, and falsely touted the company’s customer-retention and growth efforts while strategically using price increases to cause affected customers to drop their service contracts in an attempt to limit its future liability. The Fund also claims that these actions and omissions constituted a scheme to defraud ServiceMaster’s investors by inflating the company’s reported financial results relative to its true financial condition. All of this allegedly caused a financial loss to the Fund as an investor in ServiceMaster’s stock.

In response, the Defendants moved to dismiss the lawsuit for failure to state a claim. The district court concluded that, although the Fund had alleged two potentially actionable misstatements and omissions, it had failed to plead a strong inference that the Defendants had acted with the scienter required by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA), 109 Stat. 737, Pub. L. No. 104-67. Accordingly, the court dismissed the case. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

SUTTON, Chief Judge. At issue in these two cases is whether the United States Constitution prohibits Kentucky and Tennessee from limiting certain sex-transition treatments for minors experiencing gender dysphoria.

No one in these consolidated cases debates the existence of gender dysphoria or the distress caused by it. And no one doubts the value of providing psychological and related care to children facing it. The question is whether certain additional treatments—puberty blockers, hormone treatments, and surgeries—should be added to the mix of treatments available to those age 17 and under. As to that, we return to where we started. This is a relatively new diagnosis with ever-shifting approaches to care over the last decade or two. Under these circumstances, it is difficult for anyone to be sure about predicting the long-term consequences of abandoning age limits of any sort for these treatments. That is precisely the kind of situation in which life-tenured judges construing a difficult-to-amend Constitution should be humble and careful about announcing new substantive due process or equal protection rights that limit accountable elected officials from sorting out these medical, social, and policy challenges.

For these reasons, we reverse the preliminary injunctions issued in these cases and remand them for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. While L. C. was incarcerated at Federal Medical Center, Lexington (“FMC”) in Lexington, Kentucky, she was repeatedly sexually assaulted by Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) employee Hosea Lee. L. C. alleges that the BOP knew or should have known of Lee’s assaults on her and other incarcerated women. She claims that the BOP failed to enforce its zero-tolerance policy for sexual assault in BOP facilities because BOP officials failed timely to report and investigate Lee’s assaults. Accordingly, L. C. filed a negligence claim against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). Because a BOP policy imposes specific and mandatory directives on all BOP officials timely to report and investigate information pertaining to sexual assault by a BOP official, and because deciding whether to do so is not susceptible to policy considerations, this type of negligence claim falls outside the scope of the discretionary-function exception to the FTCA. But because L. C.’s specific allegations fail to state a plausible claim upon which relief can be granted, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

SILER, Circuit Judge. In 2018, First Floor Living, LLC (“First Floor”) and Lush Designs, LLC (“Lush Designs”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) each purchased real estate parcels in Cleveland for the purpose of rehabilitating and redeveloping the properties. First Floor’s property was located at 4400 Warner Road, and Lush Designs’ property was located at 7410 Linwood Avenue. Prior to Plaintiffs’ purchases, the City of Cleveland (“Cleveland”) declared the buildings on the properties public nuisances, condemned them, and ordered that they be demolished. Following the purchases, and after Plaintiffs had invested time and resources into renovating the buildings, Cleveland authorized private contractors to demolish them.

In 2021, following demolition of the buildings, Plaintiffs filed suit against Cleveland; Cuyahoga County Land Reutilization Corporation (“Land Bank”); Laster, LLC (Laster); and Baumann Enterprises, Inc. (“Baumann”) (collectively “Defendants”), arguing that the demolitions violated numerous state laws and federal constitutional provisions.1 The district court denied Plaintiffs’ Rule 56(d) motion for discovery, granted summary judgment to Defendants on the constitutional claims, and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Plaintiffs argue that the district court erred by denying their Rule 56(d) motion for discovery and by granting Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. We affirm.