Morgan & Morgan, a Florida-based injury law firm with offices in Memphis, Nashville and Murfreesboro, has sued Morgan Law Group, another Florida law firm, for allegedly violating a settlement agreement regarding keyword advertising. The lawsuit claims Morgan Law paid Google to appear at the top of search results for “Morgan & Morgan,” which Morgan & Morgan argues violates a 2020 settlement. Morgan & Morgan previously sued Morgan Law in 2017 over alleged deceptive advertising practices. The lawsuit alleges that the settlement agreement prohibits Morgan Law from using a variety of advertising words and keywords on Google and other search engines. Morgan & Morgan is seeking unspecified damages, Reuters reports.

TBA is returning to Cuba for a five-day program Feb. 6-10, 2025. This uniquely designed program will explore Cuba’s rich and varied cultural heritage and feature local scholars, attorneys and entrepreneurs, all while providing six hours of CLE credit. Activities include an Ernest Hemingway tour, tour of Cuba’s classic cars, visit to the Museum of Cuban Art and more! Get trip details and instructions for registering.

TBA President Ed Lanquist Jr. expressed support for Tennessee attorneys and the communities affected by Hurricane Helene, as well as colleagues in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and North Carolina, saying, “We are saddened by the devastation to our communities and the losses sustained by so many. Many lawyers across the southeast have been affected by the flooding and other wind damage. Our thoughts and prayers are with all of those affected. We will be looking at ways to assist in the weeks to come.” In Tennessee, significant flooding and power outages have affected the eastern part of the state. Gov. Bill Lee issued Executive Order 105 on Friday, declaring a state emergency. A federal disaster declaration followed, providing public assistance in eight counties, primarily focused on emergency work and repair or replacement of damaged facilities. For those impacted by the storm, the Tennessee Alliance for Legal Services' website Help4TN has legal information and resources, and individuals with disaster-related legal questions may call 844-HELP4TN. Resources for lawyers interested in helping are available on the TBA website. Tennessee lawyers in need of assistance may contact TBA Access to Justice Director Liz Todaro. The American Bar Association lists opportunities to help lawyers in other states on its disaster webpage.

Acadia Healthcare, a Franklin-based company, has reached a $20 million settlement with the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ). The company was the subject of a New York Times investigation earlier this month and had been accused of defrauding Medicare and Medicaid. According to a press release, prosecutors found that Acadia held patients for longer than necessary and admitted people who did not need in-patient care. Acadia also was accused of failing to provide adequate staffing, training and/or supervision of staff, which resulted in assaults, elopements, suicides and other harm. According to the Nashville Business Journal, a company spokesperson denied any wrongdoing and said Acadia cooperated with investigators.

A Loudon County jury convicted the Defendant, Ronald Matthew Lacy, of theft of property over $60,000. The Defendant, a Kentucky resident, entered into a transaction for the sale of a car with a Tennessee resident, but with the intent not to perform as promised and to misappropriate the money instead. The trial court sentenced him to ten years, which was suspended after service of eleven months and twenty-nine days in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction. He also asserts that the trial court lacked territorial jurisdiction and that the case should be addressed as a civil matter. Alternatively, the Defendant contends that he is entitled to a new trial because his trial counsel failed to provide effective assistance. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Johnny Ray Deyton, appeals his Johnson County Criminal Court convictions of possession of twenty-six (26) grams or more of methamphetamine with intent to sell or deliver, felony tampering with evidence, and various other misdemeanor drug and driving related offenses, for which he received an effective sentence of thirteen years’ imprisonment. Before trial, the Defendant filed a motion to suppress all evidence derived from the traffic stop which led to his arrest and indictment, arguing that the stop was an unreasonable warrantless seizure of his person in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the Defendant’s motion and determined that the traffic stop was supported by reasonable suspicion of reckless driving. The sole issue presented on appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the traffic stop was not supported by reasonable suspicion. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Defendant, Andy L. Allman, appeals his convictions for twelve counts of theft and six counts of falsely holding oneself out to be a lawyer in case Nos. 2017-CR-548, 2017-CR- 548, and 2017-CR-875 for which he received an effective thirty-five year sentence to be served in confinement. Multiple counts were either nolle prosequied by the State before trial or dismissed during trial. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erroneously charged the jury concerning his charges for falsely holding oneself out the be a lawyer; (3) his sentence is excessive; (4) a portion of the State’s closing argument resulted in plain error; (5) the trial court deprived Defendant of his right to present a defense by excluding evidence; (6) the trial court improperly admitted evidence of the Board of Professional Responsibility’s findings; (7) the trial court abused its discretion by denying Defendant’s motion to exclude evidence; and (8) the cumulative effect of these errors entitle him to a new trial. Following our review of the entire record, the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court but remand for entry of judgment forms for those counts that were either nolle prosequied by the State before trial or dismissed during trial.

In this case involving termination of the father’s parental rights to his children, the trial court found that six statutory grounds for termination had been proven by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court further found that clear and convincing evidence demonstrated that termination of the father’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest. The father has appealed. Upon thorough review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment in all respects.

Pro se appellant appeals the trial court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiff in this dispute about real property. Due to the deficiencies in the appellant’s brief, we dismiss the appeal. We also conclude the appeal is frivolous and remand for an assessment of damages.

This is a breach of contract case involving a purchase and sale agreement for real property. Because the parties’ mutual mistake of law concerning ownership of the subject property negates the prima facie element of mutual assent, there is no enforceable contract. Reversed and remanded.