The American Bar Association (ABA) is moving forward with new rules to standardize law school curricula and eliminate references to race and ethnicity in diversity and inclusion standards, Reuters reports. The ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar recently adopted changes to student learning outcomes, requiring schools to set minimum learning outcomes for all courses. Additionally, the council voted to gather public comments on a revised rule that would require schools to provide access to “all persons including those with identities that historically have been disadvantaged or excluded from the legal profession.” That would replace the current rule that schools provide “full opportunities” for “racial and ethnic minorities” and have a diverse student body “with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.” The move to rework the rule is designed to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 ruling against considering race in admissions, ABA officials say.

The U.S 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that insurance companies can sue over the actions of National Park Service's firefighters during the Gatlinburg wildfire of 2016. Federal courts previously held that park service officials were immune from liability for how the wildfire that killed 14 people was fought, according to Knox News. In a 2-1 opinion, a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit disagreed with those rulings. The paper suggests that the decision may provide a new path for an expanded suit from victims' families. That suit originally included similar mismanagement allegations, but those were dropped after a judge found that filings lacked the required information.

Invoicing and fee collection are no fun. With a cloud-based TBA program, you can create, review and send electronic bills from anywhere. And, with one click, clients can pay promptly with credit cards. Compare web-based vendors or server-based vendors. Find this and more in the Money Management section of TBA’s Law Firm in a Box.

Discover how artificial intelligence (AI) can revolutionize a trial practice at a webcast on Oct. 14 from noon to 1 p.m. CDT. The session will focus on practical AI tools that streamline tasks from pretrial preparation to courtroom presentations with the goal of enhancing efficiency, accuracy and overall effectiveness as a legal professional. Learn more and register here.

The TBA has launched a new section member benefit: TBA Section Talk discussion forums! Do you find yourself wishing you had other lawyers willing to discuss tricky issues? Maybe you are new to the practice and seeking advice from more seasoned colleagues. As one of the benefits to being a section member of the TBA, you now have access to your section's unique discussion forum. This forum is devoted to your practice area and open only to section members. Connect with section members to become a more engaged and effective practitioner while also helping others along the way. Sign up today by following the directions provided here.

Dresden attorney Dale Hutcherson was sworn in as Weakley County mayor, the Dresden Enterprise reports. Hutcherson is a graduate of Rhodes College and Cecil C. Humphreys College of Law in Memphis. During his time in law school, Hutcherson served on the University of Memphis Law Review and founded the University of Memphis Sports and Entertainment Law Society. He is a member of the TBA Young Lawyers Division and the immediate past chair of TBA's Entertainment and Sports Law Section. He was sworn into office by General Sessions Judge Tommy Moore.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has suspended the law license of Davidson County lawyer Mickie Smith Daugherty after finding that she failed to respond to the Board of Professional Responsibility about a complaint and posed a threat of substantial harm to the public. The court reported that the complaint alleged misappropriation of funds. Daugherty is immediately precluded from accepting any new cases and must cease representing existing clients by Sept. 19. The court also issued an order allowing documents in the case to be filed under seal.

Defendant, Cedric Taylor, was indicted for possession with intent to deliver 26 grams or more of cocaine (count one), possession with intent to deliver between one half ounce and ten pounds of marijuana (count two), and resisting arrest (count three). He entered an open guilty plea as charged in counts one and three, and the State agreed to nolle prosequi count two. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of fourteen years for count one and six months for count two to be served in confinement as a Range II multiple offender.1 On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion denying his request for community corrections. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

This second recusal appeal in the underlying conservatorship case is currently before this Court on remand from the Tennessee Supreme Court. This Court had issued an opinion vacating, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, three orders entered by the trial court, including the trial court’s order denying the second motion to recuse that is the subject of this appeal. The Supreme Court reversed that decision, holding that (1) the stay imposed by this Court during pendency of the first recusal appeal did not divest the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over the case and (2) the proponents of the stay had waived any argument that orders entered by the trial court should be vacated because they were entered prior to issuance of the mandate. Accordingly, the second recusal motion is again before this Court. Upon thorough review, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the second motion to recuse.

This appeal arises from a decision by the Tennessee Department of Human Services denying a recertification application for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits to a one-person household based upon the determination that the household’s income exceeded the eligibility requirements. After the petitioner questioned the finding, the trial court affirmed the decision of the agency and dismissed the petition for judicial review. Upon our review of the record, we affirm.