The defendant, Russell Lenard, appeals the order of the trial court revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the remainder of his six-year sentence ni confinement. Upon our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the revocation and the disposition of the defendant's probation.

The defendant, Dior Armonte Issac', pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony drug offense and driving under the influence, and the trial court imposed an effective sentence of six years' incarceration ni the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his request for alternative sentencing. After reviewing the record and considering the applicable law, we conclude that a new sentencing hearing is necessary because the trial court failed ot place the appropriate findings on the record. Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court.

A father filed a petition to establish parentage of the parties’ child. At the trial on the petition, the trial court limited the evidence to events since a hearing on pendente lite parenting time that took place 47 days before the final hearing. We have determined that the trial court abused its discretion when it limited the evidence in this way. Therefore, we vacate the court’s order in part, leaving only the current parenting plan in place pending further orders of the trial court, and remand for a new trial.

The appeal arises from a landlord-tenant dispute. Because the appellant’s brief falls well short of the requirements of both the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure and the rules of this Court, we dismiss the appeal.

The employee reported suffering a work-related mental injury as a result of the actions of certain supervisors in February 2023. Following a period of discovery, the employer filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the employee was unable, as a matter of law, to come forward with sufficient evidence that the supervisors’ alleged actions constituted a sudden or unusual mental stimulus that could support a mental injury claim under Tennessee’s Workers’ Compensation Law. The trial court agreed, concluding that no reasonable person could interpret the supervisors’ actions to constitute a sudden or unusual mental stimulus leading to a compensable mental injury. As a result, the court granted summary judgment and dismissed the employee’s case, and the employee has appealed. Because we conclude the trial court erred in its consideration of the case at the summary judgment stage, we reverse and remand the case.

A Knoxville man died after being held by Knox County Sheriff’s Office jailers at the Roger D. Wilson Detention Facility for less than a day, Knox News reports. David Batts was admitted to a local hospital on Jan. 7 with several cuts and an extremely bruised and swollen face. He died the following day. Lance Baker, a lawyer representing Batts’ family, released a statement to Knox News alleging that Batts was “tased and struck multiple times by Knox County officers” at the jail. The paper has filed multiple public records requests for video footage of Batts from both the Knoxville Police Department (KPD) and the Knox County Sheriff’s Office. “KPD officers did not use any force to detain Batts at the bus terminal. He was completely alert and appeared fine physically when he left in the ambulance,” a KPD spokesperson told Knox News in an email. A spokesperson for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation said the agency has not been asked to investigate the death.

In this TBJ Select exclusive, Belmont Law professor David Hudson draws attention to Florence Ellinwood Allen, the first female jurist to serve on a high court and who is often called "first lady of the law." During her time on the 6th Circuit bench, one of her more prominent opinions was for a special three-judge federal district court in Tennessee Electric Power Co. v. Tennessee Valley Authority, which upheld the authority of the TVA.

TBA’s 2025 Business Law Forum will take place in Nashville on April 24 from 9 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. CDT. This year's program will offer a full day of education followed by a networking reception. The forum will feature two mini-sessions: "TN Business Law 101" in the morning, focusing on key business law topics like Tennessee-specific laws, entity formation and drafting lessons; and "Advanced Topics" in the afternoon, covering complex issues such as Delaware law updates and tax provisions in limited liability corporations and partnership agreements. Attorneys also will explore ethical challenges in entity formation. This is a must-attend event for professionals seeking to connect, learn and stay current in business law. For more details and to register visit TBA’s website.

The Trial Court Vacancy Commission is now accepting applications for a circuit court judge in the 11th Judicial District, which covers Hamilton County. The vacancy was created as a result of the appointment of Judge Michael J. Dumitru to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Applicants must complete an application and submit it to the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) by noon CST on Feb. 5. The application and instructions are available on the AOC's Judicial Resources page. The commission will hold a public hearing to interview candidates on March 11 at 9 a.m. EDT in the 11th Judicial District. Qualified applicants must be licensed attorneys who are at least 30 years old, have been residents of the state for five years and live in the 11th Judicial District. For more information contact Assistant General Counsel John Jefferson.

The Tennessee Supreme Court censured Rutherford County lawyer Kirk D. Catron on Jan. 14. Catron represented a client in a child support modification and did no work on the matter for 14 months. He then recommended the client settle the matter, and he provided a proposed order for the client’s review which included a blank child support worksheet. The client declined to agree until he saw proof of income of the mother. The next day, however, Catron entered the order without notifying his client or providing a copy to him. These actions violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 3.2 and 8.4(d).