The TBA Young Lawyers Division (YLD) has selected Sue Mathews as the 2023 CASA Volunteer of the Year. Mathews is a volunteer with CASA of Maury County and has served as a court-appointed special advocate for 15 years. In nominating Mathews for the award, CASA of Maury County Executive Director Jessica Ballard said that Mathews regularly “goes above and beyond” to support, mentor and advocate for the cases she is assigned, and “embodies what it means to be an effective CASA by making sure the children’s needs are being met and their voices are heard.” The award will be presented at the YLD Board’s annual dinner on June 16 in Knoxville as part of the TBA’s Annual Convention. CASA’s mission is to train and support court-appointed volunteers who then advocate for abused and neglected children who have come to the attention of the courts. Read the TBA’s full press release here.

Don't miss the TBA's International Law Forum set to take place Friday at 1212 Germantown from 1:30-3:45 p.m. CDT. The forum will feature attorney Larry Harrington discussing international business practices in South America and Jim Hollingshad, senior advisor for economic and business affairs with the Consulate-General of Japan. A networking reception will follow the program from 3:45-5 p.m. CDT. All International Law Section members are invited to attend. Please RSVP here.

Former House Speaker Glen Casada and aide Cade Cothren face an Oct. 3 trial date on charges related to alleged bribery and kickbacks, wire fraud and money laundering, the Chattanoogan reports. The trial will be presided over by U. S. District Judge Eli Richardson in Nashville and is expected to last two to three weeks. Former state Rep. Robin Smith, who resigned from the state House after being charged with federal wire fraud charges, is expected to testify. Sentencing on her guilty plea has been delayed until the conclusion of the Casada and Cothren trial.

A New York lawyer is facing sanctions over an error-riddled brief drafted with help from ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot, reported Reuters. Steven Schwartz of Levidow, Levidow & Oberman faces a sanctions hearing on June 8 after he admitted to using ChatGPT for a brief in his client's personal injury case against Avianca Airlines. The brief cited six non-existent court decisions. Schwartz said in a court filing last week that he "greatly regrets" his reliance on the technology and was "unaware of the possibility that its contents could be false." Memphis attorney and ethics expert Brian Faughnan’s offers commentary on the case and technological competency.

A U.S. labor board official says that requiring workers to sign agreements not to join competing companies is usually illegal, reported Reuters. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo wrote in a memo to agency lawyers that "noncompete agreements" discourage workers from exercising their rights under U.S. labor law to advocate for better working conditions “unless the provision is narrowly tailored to special circumstances justifying the infringement on employee rights." In January, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission proposed a rule that would ban companies from requiring workers to sign noncompete provisions. That proposal is pending.

After reviewing more than 140 legal podcast recommendations, Attorney at Work announced the results of its first Podcast Survey. Among the top podcasts included The Hearing, Lawyerist Podcast, On Record PR, and the Digital Edge. Go here to see the full list and learn more about the survey.

BOGGS, Circuit Judge. Five sex offenders allege that the Michigan State Police (MSP) continued to enforce provisions of Michigan’s Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) against them even after federal courts declared those provisions unconstitutional. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, the plaintiffs seek damages from high ranking Michigan officials, alleging that they oversaw and failed to stop the police’s unconstitutional actions. The district court dismissed the complaint on various grounds, including sovereign immunity, and the plaintiffs appealed. We affirm, but on different grounds than the district court. The district court properly granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs fail to state a claim of supervisory liability.

The defendant, Christopher David McIntosh, appeals his effective 10-year sentence imposed by the Union County Criminal Court as a result of his guilty-pleaded convictions of six counts of sexual battery by an authority figure and two counts of theft of property valued at $1,000 or less. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in imposing partially consecutive sentences and in ordering him to serve nine months of his sentence in confinement. Discerning no error, we affirm.

A landlord leased property to company A. When company A breached the lease, the landlord filed suit against the company to recover monetary damages. A default judgment was entered against company A and, when company A failed to make any payments on that judgment, the landlord filed suit against company B and company C. The landlord alleged that the corporate veil should be pierced to hold company B and company C liable for company A’s debt because they were the alter egos of company A. After a default judgment was entered against company B and company C, they motioned to have the judgment set aside because the landlord’s complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to state a claim for piercing the corporate veil. The trial court denied the motion to set aside, and the two companies appealed. Discerning that the complaint does not state sufficient factual allegations to articulate a claim for piercing the corporate veil, we reverse and remand.

Plaintiff sued for personal injuries under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act, alleging she had experienced a fall due to an unsecure water meter valve cover located in her sister’s yard. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered an order finding that Plaintiff had not met her burden of proof. Although Plaintiff appeals the dismissal of her case, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.