Petitioner, Dan E. Durell, filed a “Motion for Correction of Sentencing Documents” (“the Motion”), claiming that the judgments in Case Nos. 29089 and 29090 did not conform to the trial court’s pronounced sentence, and as a result, his sentences were illegal. The trial court treated the Motion as a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. The court determined that the Motion failed to raise a colorable claim and summarily dismissed the Motion. Discerning no error, we affirm.

The Defendant, Bobby Gene Carney, appeals the trial court’s partial revocation of his probation, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation and ordering him to complete inpatient drug treatment based on a single instance of what were only technical violations. Based on our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Petitioner, Kenneth Barnett, appeals from the Knox County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief related to his convictions for six counts of aggravated burglary, six counts of theft, and two counts of unlawful possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred in denying relief based upon his claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to (1) investigate or seek testing of Petitioner’s blood, urine, and cigarettes; (2) file a motion to suppress Petitioner’s confession; and (3) adequately cross-examine law enforcement witnesses regarding the credibility of the confession and chain of custody issues with a gun magazine. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

This is an appeal of a divorce case. Although we affirm in part and reverse in part, we also vacate several aspects of the trial court’s judgment for the reasons stated herein and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

This appeal arises from a business relationship that deteriorated. F.W. White & Associates, LLC (“FWA”), through Fenton W. White, Jr. (“White”) (“Appellees,” collectively), sued John R. Chilton (“Chilton”), Centennial Village Apartments, LLC, and Centennial Village Development, LLC (“Appellants,” collectively) in the Chancery Court for Anderson County (“the Trial Court”) for breach of contract and quantum meruit. Appellants, in turn, sued Appellees for slander of title based on Appellees’ having recorded a document asserting an interest in the real property at issue. Appellants also sued FWA’s attorney Gregory Pratt (“Pratt”), who recorded the document. The Trial Court granted summary judgment to Pratt based on the litigation privilege. Following a bench trial, the Trial Court awarded FWA judgment against Appellants in the amount of $125,000.00 for money owed under a May 2008 consulting agreement (“the 2008 Agreement”). Regarding Appellants’ slander of title claim, the Trial Court found that White believed he was owed money and did not act maliciously. Appellants raise several issues on appeal. Meanwhile, Appellees contend that the Trial Court erred in declining to award FWA its attorney’s fees and costs under the 2008 Agreement. We affirm the Trial Court. On remand, the Trial Court is to determine and award to FWA its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred on appeal related to the enforcement of the 2008 Agreement.

A plaintiff sued a grocery store for premises liability, and the case was tried by a jury in June of 2023. The jury found the defendant store liable but awarded the plaintiff no damages. The plaintiff then appealed to this Court. However, because the plaintiff has failed to substantially comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure regarding briefing, any issues purportedly raised by the plaintiff are waived, and the appeal is dismissed.

The Tennessee Supreme Court, in an order issued yesterday, directed the Board of Professional Responsibility to respond to a filing from Hamilton County lawyer Shaheen Iltaf Imami that reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, after the state of Michigan imposed a public reprimand with conditions on April 24. On June 7, Imami filed a response with the court relying on Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 25.4 to argue that identical discipline should not be imposed in Tennessee. The board is directed to file its response to that argument no later than Aug. 1.

In this legal-malpractice case, the trial court granted Appellees’/Attorneys’ Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Appellant/Client appeals. Discerning no error, we affirm and remand.

This is the second appeal in this case. The employee was involved in a motor vehicle accident while operating a truck within the course and scope of her employment. As a result of medical evaluations following the accident, the employee was diagnosed with severe “end stage” tricompartmental osteoarthritis in both knees. The authorized treating physician selected from an employer-provided panel opined that, although the truck accident exacerbated the employee’s pre-existing condition, the primary need for total knee replacements was the underlying osteoarthritis, not the work accident. Another physician who evaluated the employee concluded that the truck accident made the employee’s previously asymptomatic condition symptomatic, and the resulting symptoms primarily caused the need for total knee replacements. Following an expedited hearing, the trial court ordered the employer to: (1) pay past medical expenses related to the left total knee replacement; (2) authorize the right total knee replacement; (3) authorize the physician the employee had selected to perform her surgery for her medical care moving forward; and (4) pay temporary total disability benefits and mileage expenses. That order was appealed, and we affirmed the trial court’s determination that the employee was likely to prevail at trial in proving she suffered a compensable aggravation of her pre-existing condition primarily caused by the truck accident. However, we reversed the trial court’s conclusion that the employee was likely to prevail in proving that the truck accident was the primary cause of her need for bilateral total knee replacements. Thereafter, the parties obtained additional proof and submitted additional evidence at a compensation hearing, after which the trial court issued a compensation order: (1) awarding the employee medical expenses related to her left total knee replacement; (2) ordering the employer to authorize all reasonable and necessary future medical benefits, including a right total knee replacement; (3) ordering the employer to authorize the employee’s physician to provide future medical treatment; and (4) awarding total disability benefits, permanent total disability benefits, and discretionary costs. The employer has appealed. Upon careful consideration of the record and arguments of counsel, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and certify as final the trial court’s order as modified.

Effective July 1, West Tennessee Legal Services (WTLS), which is headquartered in Jackson, will be funded by the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) to provide people in the greater Memphis metropolitan area with free legal help on civil matters. LSC is a federally funded agency that provides financial support to civil legal aid programs like WTLS nationwide, ensuring access to civil legal assistance for low-income individuals and families across the United States. WTLS’ work in Shelby, Tipton, Fayette and Lauderdale counties will be funded for the remainder of 2024 with a $940,301 grant from LSC. WTLS’ annual budget is supplemented with grants from individuals, foundations, the state of Tennessee and federal grants. “Our team is eager to get work providing these crucial services to individuals and families across this region,” says WTLS Executive Director Ashley Holliday. “As we grow, our focus will remain constant: to ensure that people in need have access to justice and the support they deserve.” Read the press release from the organization.