The Tennessee Supreme Court issued an order on Jan. 17 referring a petition from Carter County lawyer Jason Lee Holly seeking dissolution of a temporary suspension to the Board of Professional Responsibility. The court had imposed the suspension on Holly on Oct. 28, 2024, for failing to respond to the board concerning complaints of misconduct. Holly filed a reinstatement petition on Jan. 3, stating he had complied with all conditions imposed by the court, but the board argued that he had not complied with all conditions. The court directed the board to hold a hearing to consider the petition.

The Tennessee Supreme Court issued an order on Jan. 17 soliciting comments on proposed changes to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, sections 26.4 and 33.1. The deadline for submitting comments is March 3. Written comments should reference docket No. ADM2025-00078 and be emailed to appellatecourtclerk@tncourts.gov or mailed to Clerk James Hivner, 100 Supreme Court Building, 401 7th Ave. N., Nashville, TN 37219-1407, RE: Proposed Amendments to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, sections 26.4 & 33.1. The changes primarily deal with the process for appealing the judgment of a Board of Professional Responsibility hearing panel.

TBA's Indigent Representation Primer series recently featured an item that looks at the right to counsel for indigent parties in criminal cases, including factors that courts may consider in determining to appoint an attorney for a defendant. Procedures for appointing counsel may vary by court, but typically function through a combination of public defender offices and court-appointed private attorneys. Tennessee's state constitution and state law align with the Sixth Amendment and federal rulings that guarantee indigent defendants receive legal representation in criminal cases where they are facing incarceration. There are other situations where the right to appointed counsel may be guaranteed, including cases involving juveniles, some immigration cases and both trial and appeals for individuals facing the death penalty.

Gov. Bill Lee on Friday appointed Jeremy Ball as circuit court judge in the 4th Judicial District, which covers Cocke, Grainger, Jefferson and Sevier counties. Ball served as assistant district attorney for the 4th Judicial District. He earned his bachelor’s degree at Carson-Newman College and law degree at Vanderbilt University Law School. Ball was appointed to fill the vacancy created by the death of Judge Duane Slone. The appointment is effective immediately. Read an announcement from the Administrative Office of the Courts.

Texas lawyer Nuru Witherspoon has received a public censure from the Tennessee Supreme Court. Witherspoon, through two non-lawyer independent contractors employed by his law firm, unlawfully solicited Tennessee families while they were planning funerals in connection with the death of a child in Memphis and with the Woodmore Elementary school bus crash that occurred in Chattanooga. Witherspoon’s contracted employees targeted communication to the victims’ families within 30 days of the accidents, engaging in five acts of solicitation in violation of the Unauthorized Practice of Law Statute and one act of a non-lawyer falsely advertising or holding himself out as a lawyer in violation of the law. Witherspoon ordered or knew about the employees’ conduct and failed to take reasonable remedial action to correct it. He was aware of and responsible in his supervisory role for the contract employees’ conduct, and he also acted in common enterprise with the contract employees in committing unfair or deceptive practices. Witherspoon violated Rules of Professional Conduct 5.3(c), 7.3(a) and (b) and 8.4(a) and (c).

The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law Law Review’s 2025 symposium, "The Ripple Effect: Examining the Supreme Court's Impact on the Public's Confidence in the Judicial Branch," will explore public trust in state and federal courts. Discussions will focus on the following topics and their impact on practitioners: judicial transparency, stare decisis and religious liberty jurisprudence. This year’s keynote presentation includes a panel of federal and state judges and justices to provide a unique "view from the bench." The event will be Feb. 21 at the law school. Register here.

The Memphis City Council has voted unanimously to reappoint Memphis Police Department (MPD) Chief C.J. Davis, The Daily Memphian reports. Davis has been serving in an interim capacity for the past year, after Memphis Mayor Paul Young delayed the vote on Davis’ reappointment last January. The delay followed a test vote in a council committee session and comments from some council members that they wanted to see a drop in crime and a more visible effort by the Memphis Police Department before voting on Davis.  The Department of Justice in December released a report finding that the MPD and the city of Memphis engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law, which some council members referenced during Davis' confirmation vote. Davis took the helm of MPD in 2021 as an appointee of former Mayor Jim Strickland and the department’s first female chief.

In a new episode of "The Hope People" podcast from Belmont University's President Dr. Greg Jones, Davidson County Chancellor I'Ashea Myles shares her journey of studying vocal performance at Belmont to becoming the first Black female civil trial court judge in Davidson County. The episode covers the power of authenticity and representation as a model for future leaders who may not see immediate representation in their chosen fields, the importance of maintaining relationships with mentors as a catalyst for growth, and the resilience and perseverance needed in the face of challenges. Myles says, “I hope that I inspire grit and tenacity to say ‘you can do it’ even when you've not seen someone do it before.” Listen to the episode here.

Several Tennessee lawmakers were subpoenaed last week to testify in the upcoming corruption trial of former House Speaker Glen Casada and his ex-chief of staff, Cade Cothren, who face federal charges of bribery and kickbacks involving a vendor, Phoenix Solutions. Cothren allegedly ran the vendor under a false identity, “Matthew Phoenix,” to secure state-funded contracts for mailers and caucus work, earning tens of thousands of dollars. Casada, prosecutors allege, recruited his fellow lawmakers for business and then accepted kickbacks, reports the Tennessean. According to the Tennessee Lookout, the subpoenas came at the request of Cothren’s defense team, while former Rep. Robin Smith of Hixson, who pleaded guilty in the case, is cooperating with prosecutors. Casada resigned in 2019 amid multiple scandals. The trial is set to begin on April 22.

RANDAL S. MASHBURN, Chief Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge. An effort to raise an issue for the first time at the appellate level is destined for failure. That lesson applies here, resulting in affirmance of the bankruptcy court. A Chapter 11, Subchapter V, debtor’s owners and a related, non-creditor third-party appealed orders approving the sale of the debtor’s real property pursuant to a confirmed plan that allowed the plan trustee wide discretion in conducting a sale. The owners failed to participate in the bankruptcy sale proceedings in any meaningful way. Although the related third-party participated, it was merely as a competing bidder in the context of a private sale, with only its desire to purchase the debtor’s assets arguably being impaired by the sale orders. Therefore, it lacks standing to appeal the orders. The third-party did make an untimely and untested allegation of having pre-existing purchase contracts for some of the properties. To the extent the alleged contractual interest shows an impaired pecuniary interest and thus standing, the third-party did not preserve its appeal rights. Neither the third-party nor the debtor’s owners obtained a stay of the sale orders. On appeal, appellants seek a complete reversal of the sale orders and the consummated sales. By not obtaining a stay, appellants are limited on appeal by 11 U.S.C. § 363(m) to challenging the purchasers’ good faith. All appellants waived any such argument by not raising it during the bankruptcy court proceedings. Similarly, the Appellants waived any challenge to the Howe Compensation Orders by not objecting to the relief requested in the bankruptcy court proceedings. The Howe Compensation Orders are also affirmed.