The indigent representation proposal from the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) on behalf of the Tennessee Supreme Court is designed not only to ensure that the state meets its obligations under the law, but also provides for a phased implementation to strategically address the special needs of some communities and case types. During last year's effort to increase the compensation rate for appointed attorneys, the AOC was encouraged to consider alternatives, including ones that would better address the needs of smaller and rural communities. This proposal seeks to respond to those concerns by providing flexibility and stability to focus on building capacity in those areas, as well as for contracts that require tailored solutions such as those for complex cases. The proposed plan requires a recurring appropriation of $17 million, and over time, the dollars used to pay today’s claims would be used to expand contracting options. Learn more about the plan and indigent representation in Tennessee.

The TBA will host three ethics webcasts on March 27, featuring the CLE Performer Stuart Teicher. The sessions will blend humor, pop culture and professional responsibility to provide insightful lessons on attorney ethics. Wedded Bliss and Attorney Ethics will explore how principles of a lasting marriage connect to legal ethics, covering topics like communication and conflicts of interest. Ted Lasso and Attorney Ethics will use moments from the hit show to illustrate integrity, leadership and key rules of professional conduct. The Perfect Pop Song and Attorney Ethics will reveal what makes a song timeless and relate it to legal competence, communication and ethical structure. Attorneys can register for these interactive webcasts through the TBA website.

DAVIS, Circuit Judge. In 2021, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) promulgated a rule requiring Title X grant recipients to provide neutral, nondirective counseling and referrals for abortions to patients who request it. Tennessee, which has been a Title X recipient for over 50 years, recently outlawed most abortions in the state. After doing so, Tennessee would commit only to conducting counseling and referrals for options deemed legal in the state. HHS considered Tennessee’s commitment to be out of compliance with its regulatory requirements. So it opted to discontinue the grant. Tennessee filed suit to challenge HHS’s action and enjoin it from closing the grant. The district court denied Tennessee’s request for preliminary injunction because it held that Tennessee does not have a strong likelihood of succeeding on the merits of its claim and that the balance of the remaining preliminary injunction factors weigh in HHS’s favor. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

The Defendant, Jasmin Moore, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of first degree felony murder in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate a robbery and of especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-202(a)(2) (2018) (subsequently amended) (first degree felony murder), 39-13-403 (2018) (especially aggravated robbery). The trial court imposed a life sentence for the first degree murder conviction and a concurrent sentence of sixteen years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the trial court erred in denying her motion to dismiss based upon an alleged violation of her right to a speedy trial, (2) the court erred in several evidentiary rulings, (3) the court erred in denying her request for a jury instruction regarding unavailable evidence, (4) the court erred in permitting police recruits to attend the trial, and (5) she should receive a new trial due to the cumulative effect of the alleged trial errors. We affirm the judgments of the criminal court.

The Defendant, Brandon Lee May, appeals his Knox County Criminal Court convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, evading arrest, and criminal trespass, for which he received an effective sentence of fifteen years' incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that his sentence is excessive. Discerning no error, we affirm.

A hearing panel of the Board of Professional Responsibility concluded that Daryl A. Gray violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(d) and (e), 1.16, 4.1(a), and 8.4(c) of the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct and suspended him from the practice of law for six months. The violations stemmed from two separate complaints, both involving Mr. Gray’s representation of plaintiffs in personal injury lawsuits. The trial court affirmed the hearing panel’s decision. After careful consideration, we too affirm.

A coalition of 38 state attorneys general and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday proposed a final package of remedies aimed at ending Google's monopoly over internet search engines. The proposal, which closely follows an initial filing made in November, comes after a decision in which a federal judge ruled Google is a monopolist in online search. Led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, the coalition and DOJ say the plan will foster innovation and benefit consumers by dismantling barriers to entry in the market. "We proved Google violated antitrust law in an epic federal trial," Skrmetti said in a press release. "Now it's time to solve the problem." The proposed remedies include banning search-related payments to distribution partners like Apple and Android, requiring Google to divest Chrome and mandating the sharing of certain search, user and ad data with competitors for a limited time. In addition, the plaintiffs would be entitled to a preliminary review of Google's future financial interests in online search and generative AI competitors. A hearing on the proposal is set to begin April 21 and conclude May 9.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has upheld the suspension of Shelby County lawyer Daryl A. Gray’s law license. Two complaints were filed against Gray. The first alleged that he improperly handled funds after he settled a client’s personal injury lawsuit by refusing to pay a medical provider’s valid lien and falsely asserting that other medical providers had filed claims. The second, stemming from a different personal injury lawsuit, alleged that Gray filed the action against the wrong defendant, never served the amended complaint on the correct defendant, failed to adequately communicate with his client about a motion to dismiss, and failed to timely withdraw from representation. A Board of Professional Responsibility hearing panel determined that Gray violated professional conduct rules and recommended a six-month suspension, with two months to be served on active suspension and the remainder on probation. Gray challenged the recommended discipline, claiming it was unfounded, arbitrary, capricious and excessive. The court rejected his arguments and imposed the suspension. Read the BPR's press release.

The TBA will host the next installment of its IP Webcast Series on March 19 from 11 a.m. to noon CDT. The webcast will focus on the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on prior art and its implications for patent law. The course also will look at the future of AI-generated disclosures. For more information and to register visit the TBA website. Intellectual Property Section members save on registration costs. Not a member? Join now!

The Tennessee Supreme Court on March 7 issued an order amending Rule 9, sections 26.4 and 33.1. The court had sought comments on the proposed changes in January and noted that the 45-day comment period expired on March 3. In section 26.4, the court changed the rule governing suspension of lawyers for failure to pay the professional privilege tax to clarify that the suspension “be effective immediately” after the court files a suspension order, and that the suspension “shall” remain in effect until the taxes are paid. In section 33.1, the court made four changes to the process for appealing the judgment of a disciplinary hearing panel or a trial court. The amendments took effect immediately upon adoption of the order. Review a redline version of the changes.