Petitioner, Billie Joe Chapman, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

This appeal involves the disbursement of settlement proceeds proffered by an insurance company in resolution of a claim against it. The plaintiff is the surviving spouse of the decedent, who was killed when she was struck by a vehicle while riding her bicycle. The plaintiff filed a wrongful death action against the vehicle’s driver and the driver’s parents, all of whom were subsequently dismissed from the lawsuit following a settlement unrelated to this appeal. Within the same action, the plaintiff asserted a claim against his and the decedent’s insurer for negligent misrepresentation and negligent failure to procure insurance. The insurer had previously paid a pre-suit settlement to the plaintiff related to uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. In the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the insurer had misrepresented additional coverage under an “umbrella policy,” leading the plaintiff and decedent to believe they were covered while failing to actually reinstate the umbrella policy when it had been temporarily cancelled months before the decedent’s death. The plaintiff and the insurer eventually reached a confidential settlement. To facilitate the release of claims by both the plaintiff and the decedent’s estate and upon the estate’s motion, the trial court entered an agreed order allowing the estate to intervene. The plaintiff then filed a motion to disburse the settlement proceeds to him, and the estate filed an intervening complaint and opposition to the plaintiff’s motion, asserting that the estate was entitled to one hundred percent of the settlement proceeds related to the umbrella policy claim. Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order granting the plaintiff’s motion to disburse the settlement proceeds to him upon finding that the cause of action against the insurer had not vested in the decedent prior to her death. The court subsequently denied the estate’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. The estate has appealed. Determining that the cause of action against the insurer was based in tort, rather than wrongful death, and accrued to the decedent at the time of her fatal injuries, we conclude that the right to the resulting settlement proceeds belongs to the decedent’s estate. We therefore reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand for entry of an order granting disbursal of the settlement funds to the estate.

The Defendant, Demarcus Taiwan Russell, Jr., was convicted by a Greene County Criminal Court jury of driving under the influence (“DUI”), simple possession of marijuana, driving on a suspended license, and speeding. He was sentenced by the trial court to an effective term of 11 months, 29 days, suspended to supervised probation after service of two days in the county jail. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for his DUI conviction and argues that the State made an improper closing argument. Based on our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Defendant, Carl Paige, pleaded guilty to attempted second degree murder and agreed to an eight-year sentence with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced him to a term of eight years to be served in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his request to suspend his sentence to probation. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The State appeals the trial court’s order granting the motion of the defendant, Mark David Bond, to suppress evidence seized during the search of his vehicle after a drug detection canine indicated the presence of narcotics during a sweep around the perimeter of the vehicle. The State challenges the trial court’s conclusion that the canine’s reaction was unreliable due to the canine’s inability to distinguish between the odor of illegal marijuana and the odor of legal hemp. After review, we reverse the trial court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress, reinstate the indictment against the defendant, and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

Plaintiffs brought suit alleging breach of contract and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing against the mortgage servicer of their loan. The mortgage servicer sought summary judgment on two grounds: (1) an absence of privity and (2) its actions did not violate any provision of the contract. The Plaintiffs conceded that the mortgage servicer’s actions did not violate any specific term of the contract and indicated their suit exclusively relied on a claim predicated upon breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the mortgage servicer. The trial court acknowledged but declined to rule upon the mortgage servicer’s privity argument and instead granted summary judgment based on its conclusion that a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing cannot occur in the absence of a breach of a specific term of the contract. The Plaintiffs appealed. We affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the ground that there is no privity of contract between the Plaintiffs and the mortgage servicer.

This is a post-divorce dispute. Two primary issues are presented, whether the trial court erred by (1) holding the mother in civil contempt for violating the Permanent Parenting Plan and the Parental Rights Statute and (2) reversing the Shelby County Divorce Referee’s ruling regarding the father’s child support obligations. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the findings of contempt as well as the ruling setting aside the Divorce Referee’s ruling and remand with instructions to reinstate the Order Confirming the Divorce Referee’s Ruling.

3M has agreed to pay $6 billion to settle over 250,000 lawsuits that accuse the company of selling defective combat earplugs that caused hearing loss in hundreds of thousands of military service members. Reuters reports the deal was announced today after a failed attempt by 3M to move the lawsuits, which are currently the largest mass tort litigation in U.S. history, into bankruptcy court. Combat Arms earplugs were made by Aearo Technologies, a company 3M acquired in 2008. The earplugs were used by the U.S. military from 2003 to 2015, including in Afghanistan and Iraq. A U.S. judge dismissed Aearo’s recent bankruptcy claim, noting that Aearo, as a subsidiary of 3M, enjoys a "greater degree of financial security than warrants bankruptcy protection."

The Rutherford County Library Board has ordered four books pulled from shelves following a recently-adopted Murfreesboro community decency standards ordinance and a Tennessee General Assembly law that requires children be protected from sexual descriptions, reports the Tennessean. During a contentious meeting, the board voted to remove the young adult books "Flamer" by Mike Curato, "Let's Talk About It" by Erika Moen, "Queerfully & Wonderfully Made" edited by Leigh Finke and "This Book is Gay" by Juno Dawson. Library card members can still gain access online to the materials because the state law and city ordinance does not govern internet access. In June, Murfreesboro City Council members agreed to an ordinance that includes punishments for violators exposing children on any city property to "public expressions appealing to prurient interests or that are offensive to prevailing community standards."

Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti announced his office has reached a settlement with Auburn Hills Mobile Home Park to resolve the state’s suit alleging the park took advantage of residents in violation of state and federal law. Shortly after a deadly tornado in April 2020, allegations emerged that park managers were holding charitable donations intended for residents. Further investigation revealed the park failed to address severe septic issues that caused raw sewage to pool on the ground and back up into homes in addition to other charges. The settlement requires the defendants to develop a sewer system and secures $750,000 to go toward consumer restitution, civil penalties and litigation costs. Affected consumers will be contacted soon regarding restitution payments.