Electronic voting for the TBA's vice presidential election will close tomorrow. Members should have received an email on Jan. 31 with a ballot for the two candidates running for vice president. The email was sent from Intelliscan Inc. If you did not receive the email in your inbox, please check your spam folder or with your firm’s IT administrator. If you have any questions about the election process, please contact elections@tnbar.org.

Join the TBA and President Ed Lanquist Jr. in traveling north to Louisville, Kentucky, for a unique CLE experience! Urban Bourbon includes four hours of dynamic CLE programming with special guest speakers Brian Haara (author of "Bourbon Justice: How Whiskey Law Shaped America"), Davidson County Chancellor Anne Martin and Tennessee Court of Appeals Judge W. Neal McBrayer, a welcome dinner at PROOF on Main and a tour and tastings at some of the most popular bourbon distilleries in the city. Urban Bourbon will take place April 4-5 in downtown Louisville. Programming will be held at the offices of the Louisville Bar Association, which is within walking distance of the host hotel. Get more information and register here.

An ethics complaint filed by Sen. Brent Taylor, R-Memphis, against Shelby County District Attorney (DA) Steve Mulroy has been dismissed, the DA's office has announced. In an interview with The Commercial Appeal, Mulroy said the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility dismissed the complaint, which contained four allegations. The board’s dismissal means there will be no further review of the complaint, according the paper. Taylor has filed multiple complaints against Mulroy, including a more recent one that remains under review. That complaint addresses Mulroy’s collaboration with Juvenile Court Judge Tarik Sugarmon to explore allowing adult court judges access to juvenile court records for bail decisions. The dismissed complaint comes as Taylor continues efforts to remove Mulroy from office, alleging the DA has overstepped his authority and is interpreting the law based on personal beliefs, the paper reports.

An administrative law judge entered an order of default against Appellant for failing to appear at a resetting of his contested case hearing on a civil asset forfeiture. On appeal, the Commissioner’s Designee for the Department of Safety and Homeland Security affirmed the administrative law judge’s entry of default, denying Appellant’s request to set aside the same order. Appellant appealed the Commissioner Designee’s decision to the Chancery Court, raising that the administrative officials lacked authority to default his case because they did not swear an oath of office commensurate with that sworn by judicial branch judges of the Tennessee state judiciary. The Chancery Court affirmed the administrative officials’ decisions. Appellant appealed to this court. We affirm.

Petitioner, Milburn L. Edwards, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his third petition for post-conviction relief because it was time-barred. Following our review of the entire record, the briefs, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State employee Insured received radiation treatment for tongue cancer. Insurance Company denied authorization of the treatment as “investigational” and not “medically necessary” pursuant to the insurance plan and its medical policy. After two direct appeals of the denial to the insurance claim administrator, Insured appealed to the Tennessee Claims Commission. The Claims Commission found that the treatment was investigational under the plain language of both the plan and the policy and thus not a covered expense. As the denial of coverage did not amount to a breach of contract, the Claims Commission granted Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

A business sought a special use permit from the City of Memphis to operate a used car lot. At a meeting of the city council, the council voted to remand the business’s application back to the local land use control board. At the next meeting, the council reconsidered the application and denied it. The business filed a writ of certiorari challenging the denial, alleging due process violations and stating that the council failed to follow its rules of procedure. The trial court found that no due process right applied and that the council had properly followed its rules of procedure. We affirm.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has transferred the law license of Blount County lawyer Horace Maynard Brown III to disability inactive status after finding that he “is currently incapacitated from continuing the practice of law.” Brown will remain on inactive status until further order of the court. He may not practice law while on inactive status but may petition the court for reinstatement by showing the disability has been removed.

Gilson Daub, a workers’ compensation defense, subrogation and civil litigation law firm, has announced its expansion into Tennessee with the opening of a Nashville office. Attorney Jeff Powell, who joins as managing partner, will lead the firm’s presence in the region. Powell brings over a decade of workers’ compensation litigation experience, having practiced in Illinois since 2010 and Tennessee since 2021, according to a press release. Powell will be responsible for establishing and expanding the firm's Tennessee operations, bringing on new attorneys and clients, and introducing the firm's culture to the region. “Many firms operate under outdated models, but Gilson Daub stands apart with its structured, strategic vision. The technology, teamwork, and culture ... are unmatched, so I’m excited to bring that same energy and commitment to Tennessee,” Powell said. The firm currently serves 20 cities across 10 different states.

A federal judge in Delaware has ruled that Ross Intelligence violated copyright law when it copied content from Thomson Reuters to build a competing artificial intelligence-based legal platform. According to Reuters, U.S. Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas' decision against the now defunct legal-research firm marks the first U.S. ruling on the closely watched question of fair use in AI-related copyright litigation. The "fair use" argument has become a key defense for tech companies, including OpenAI, Microsoft and Meta Platforms, fighting lawsuits brought by authors, record labels, visual artists and others over the use of their material to train AI systems. Tech companies argue that generative AI systems make fair use of copyrighted material by studying it to learn to create new content, while copyright owners say the companies use their work to generate competing content that threatens their livelihoods.