The Tennessee Education Association (TEA), the state’s largest teachers union, is suing in federal court to block the “prohibited concept” law of 2021, the Tennessee Journal reports. The suit, brought against the state education commissioner and members of the state board of education, challenges the constitutionality of the law for its vague language and subjective enforcement. The suit also claims the law interferes with “instruction on difficult but important topics” included in state standards, which were “developed and approved by Tennesseans.” The TEA is asking the court to issue a permanent injunction against enforcement of the law and declare the law unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Emergency medical personnel in Southfield, Michigan, pronounced Timesha Beauchamp dead when she was still alive. Beauchamp was placed in a body bag and transported to a funeral home, where an embalmer discovered that she was not dead. Beauchamp was hospitalized and died about six weeks later. Howard Linden, the administrator of Beauchamp’s estate, sues the City of Southfield (the “City”) and individual emergency medical personnel for their actions, which he says violated Beauchamp’s constitutional rights. The district court found that Linden failed to plead a constitutional violation and accordingly granted the defendants-appellees’ motion to dismiss Beauchamp’s claims. Because the individual defendants-appellees in this case are entitled to qualified immunity, and because the City is not liable for any constitutional violation, we affirm the district court on alternative grounds.

The appellant filed a notice of appeal more than thirty days from the date of entry of the order from which the appellant is seeking to appeal. Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, we have no jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

Because the order appealed from does not constitute a final appealable judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

In this interlocutory appeal, the employer appeals the trial court’s order instructing it to provide the employee a panel of orthopedic physicians. The employee was injured in an accident while driving a company-owned vehicle. Prior to the accident, the employee had been at work, sorting his schedule for the day, when he suffered intestinal issues. Due to an unfortunate incident, the employee decided to return home to shower and change before completing sales calls later that day. On the way to his home, while in the company-owned vehicle, he was involved in a single vehicle accident. His employer denied that the accident occurred in the course and scope of his employment, asserting accidents on the way to and from work are not compensable. The trial court determined that this case was an exception to the general rule because the employee was in a company-provided vehicle and was not on a personal errand. The employer has appealed. After careful consideration of the entire record, we affirm the court’s determination and remand the case.

If you missed Stuart Teicher's presentation "From Bach to Beyonce: What Musical Arrangements Teach About Legal Writing" in June, the webcast will replay this Friday from noon to 1 p.m. CDT. Join Teicher to learn how to tackle the hardest part of legal writing: the organization phase. Among other topics, he will talk about how to create a "mind map" and get into details about outlining your work.

A federal judge in California has blocked a new Biden administration rule limiting access to asylum, reports WKRN-Nashville. The decision will take effect in two weeks. In his ruling, U.S. District Court Justice Jon Tigar referenced U.S. asylum law, writing that the new policy undermines the clear intent of Congress in establishing a safe haven for those fleeing persecution and danger. The ruling is a loss for the Biden administration, which had required that asylum-seekers must first seek the protections of another country along their route to the U.S.

President Joe Biden says his administration is moving forward with new regulations meant to push insurance companies to increase their coverage of mental health treatments, the Associated Press reports. The new rules would require insurers to study patient outcomes to ensure mental and physical health benefits are administered equally. The proposed regulations still need to go through a public comment period,

The appellant, Kathy Delores Horton (prospectively D/B/A A-Team Bail Bond Company, LLC), appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of her petition to operate a new bail bond company. The appellant asserts that the trial court erred in denying her petition because she had the requisite two years of experience working as a qualified agent. The appellant also raises a challenge regarding the en banc panel, the denial of a claim concerning ex parte communications, and an equal protection claim. Following our review, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the appellant’s petition, as well as her other claims.

This is an eminent domain case in which the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Transportation (“the State”) condemned two portions of the defendant’s eighteen-acre property in Shelby County. Prior to a jury trial to determine the fair market value of the condemned property, the State filed a motion in limine to exclude evidence of or reference to a prior sale of a portion of the defendant’s real property to a neighboring fireworks business. The State argued that the previous sale was not an arm’s-length transaction or a comparable sale. The trial court granted the State’s motion in limine, excluding the prior sale from the jury’s consideration. The defendant has appealed. Determining that the defendant has failed to properly cite to the record in its appellate brief or provide us with a sufficient record on appeal, we conclude that the defendant has waived its challenge to the trial court’s exclusion of evidence. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order.