The Appellant, Jermaine Mitchell Gray, appeals his conviction of the sale of 0.5 grams or more of methamphetamine for which he received a sentence of ten years’ imprisonment. He argues: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the State failed to reveal the existence and identity of a second confidential informant in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); and (3) the trial court denied his right of allocution before sentencing. We additionally deny appointed counsel’s July 18 motion to withdraw as counsel in this case. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation terminated a preferred service employee. Following the Step I and Step II appeals, the Board of Appeals upheld the termination. The employee petitioned for judicial review in the trial court. The trial court initially affirmed the Board of Appeals’ decision. The trial court then granted the employee’s motion to alter or amend and reversed the decision of the Board of Appeals. We reverse the trial court’s order.

This appeal concerns a petition to terminate a father’s parental rights. The trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that four grounds for termination existed: (1) abandonment by failure to visit; (2) abandonment by failure to support; (3) incarceration under a ten-year sentence; and (4) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody or financial responsibility. The trial court also found that termination was in the best interest of the child. The father appeals. We reverse the trial court’s finding that clear and convincing evidence established the grounds of abandonment by failure to visit and abandonment by failure to support. However, we affirm its findings that the remaining grounds were proven and that termination was in the best interest of the child.

This is a termination of parental rights and adoption case. Appellant/Father appeals the trial court’s termination of his parental rights on the ground of abandonment by failure to provide more than token support and failure to exercise more than token visitation. Father also appeals the trial court’s determination that termination of his parental rights is in the child’s best interest. Because Father met his burden to show that his failure to provide support and to visit was not willful, we reverse the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights and granting Appellees’ petition for adoption.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently extended its suspension of 97-year-old Judge Pauline Newman for another year. The court’s judicial council suspended Newman in 2023 saying she refused to cooperate with an investigation into her fitness after staff raised concerns about her mental health. The members of the council now say that Newman did not convince them that the suspension should be lifted given the “voluminous record” showing “serious concerns” about her cognitive state. Newman’s lawyer vowed to continuing fighting the suspension, Reuters reports.

This interlocutory appeal presents an issue of first impression concerning statutory construction. We are asked in this case to determine whether an employer is entitled to the Social Security offset outlined in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-207(4)(A)(i) if the effect of applying the offset lowers an employee’s weekly workers’ compensation rate to below the “minimum weekly benefit” as defined by statute. The employee was already receiving Social Security retirement benefits when she fell and injured her right arm at work. Following medical treatment, she alleged she was permanently and totally disabled as a result of the injury. Although the employer accepted the compensability of the claim, it filed a motion for partial summary judgment asking the court to set the appropriate compensation rate because, if the Social Security offset was applied, the employee’s weekly benefit amount would be less than the statutory minimum compensation rate. The trial court determined that even though the statute provided an offset, the employer must nonetheless pay the minimum weekly benefit for the employee’s permanent disability. The employer has appealed. Upon careful consideration of the record, we affirm the trial court’s order as modified and remand the case.

A decision issued last week from the Tennessee Supreme Court Special Workers’ Compensation Panel found two significant provisions of The Reform Act to be constitutional. Though the case — Worrell v. Obion County School District — was not the first to challenge the law, the decision was the most substantive appellate opinion on the subject to date, the Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims writes in a blog post. The court details the specific provisions of the act that were challenged and upheld. It also notes that full Supreme Court declined to hear the case, so the panel decision is final. 

A 9th U.S. Circuit panel has ruled that seven states lack legal standing to impose restrictions on the abortion pill mifepristone, such as bans on telemedicine prescriptions and mail dispensing. The court found that these states could not demonstrate harm from the Federal Drug Administration's removal of the in-person dispensing requirement. The decision follows a similar ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld access to mifepristone after a challenge was filed by a group of anti-abortion doctors. Reuters reports several states also are pursuing related claims in a Texas federal court to reinstate restrictions on the drug.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency action to restore parts of a new Title IX rule in states where the regulations have been blocked. According to The Hill, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar asked the court to limit the injunctions to only the gender identity discrimination provision, arguing that other elements of the rule — such as enhanced protections for pregnant and parenting students and updated procedures for sexual harassment and assault claims — should be allowed to take effect. In April, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti joined a multi-state lawsuit against the Department of Education, which challenged the new updates. That suit led to an injunction on implementation of the rule, which recently was upheld by a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Nashville lawyer Ashley L. Upkins recently was elected president-elect of the National Bar Association (NBA) at the group’s annual meeting in Las Vegas. She will take over as president in 2025 and will be the first Tennessee woman to serve in the role. During her year as president-elect, Upkins will help plan the organization’s landmark 100th Annual Convention in Chicago next year, where she will be sworn in as president. Upkins has been an active NBA member since her days as a member of the inaugural Belmont University College of Law class and has held several leadership positions. She currently leads litigation at Silicon Ranch, an independent power producer. Founded in 1925, the NBA is the nation’s oldest and largest association of Black lawyers, judges, law professors and law students. Read more in a release from the group.