A Montgomery County jury convicted the defendants, Jevon Brodie and Tavares Harbison, each of one count of aggravated robbery, one count of theft of property greater than $10,000, but less than $60,000, and one count of theft of property under $500. Brodie was additionally convicted of two counts of reckless homicide and received an effective sentence of sixteen years in confinement. Harbison was also convicted of two counts of criminally negligent homicide and received an effective sentence of fourteen years in confinement. On appeal, the defendants contend that (1) the juvenile court erred in transferring their cases to circuit court without making individualized findings; (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction for theft greater than $10,000; and (3) the trial court erred in sentencing the defendants. Additionally, Brodie insists that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on causation and that the prosecutor’s statements during summation were improper. Upon review of the record, the parties’ briefs, oral arguments, and considering the applicable law, we affirm the decisions of the juvenile and trial courts. However, we remand for the limited consideration by the trial court as to the application of the Wilkerson factors in determining the propriety of consecutive sentencing for Tavares Harbison.

The Defendant, Scott Allen Briggs, was convicted by a Blount County Circuit Court jury of rape of a child, a Class A felony, for which he is serving a thirty-five-year sentence as a Range II offender. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-522 (2018) (subsequently amended) (rape of a child, Range II or higher sentencing requirement). On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motions to dismiss due to the State’s failure to preserve evidence, (2) the court erred by instructing the jury on flight, (3) the court abused its discretion in three of its evidentiary rulings, and (4) the court erred in sentencing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Nashville Conflict Resolution Center CEO Shannon Wagner recently sat down with the Nashville Post to talk about her transition to the top spot at the organization. Wagner, who previously served as the center’s assistant director, took the helm in April following the retirement of Sara Figal. Wagner explains the mission of the center (offering free community mediation for a myriad of conflicts), the types of cases it accepts and her goals for increasing unrestricted giving. She also talks about her desire to see the center take more juvenile cases and expand capacity in its parenting program. Volunteer mediators need not be lawyers but must complete about 40 hours of Rule 31 training. Read more from the interview.

The trial court granted Appellee’s motion for extension of an order of protection against Appellant. Appellant argues that her due process rights were violated insofar as she was denied the opportunity to confront witnesses and offer testimony. Based on the statement of the evidence, we agree. Vacated and remanded.

In this divorce appeal, the husband challenges the trial court’s classification of real estate as marital property and its ruling regarding dissipation of the marital estate. Following a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Following the Decedent’s death, no original will could be found. One of his daughters filed a petition to administer a copy of a lost will, which the trial court granted. We reverse, concluding the evidence does not overcome the strong presumption in favor of revocation of the lost will.

Loring Justice (“Justice”) filed a complaint against Kim Nelson (“Nelson”); David Valone (“Valone”) and the Law Office of David Valone (collectively, “Valone Defendants”); and Martha Meares (“Meares”), and Meares and Associates and/or Meares and Dillard (collectively, “Meares Defendants”), (collectively, “Defendants”) in the Chancery Court for Knox County (“the Trial Court”). Justice alleged, inter alia, wrongful execution of judgment and abuse of process. Nelson filed a motion to classify Justice’s action as an abusive civil action (“ACA”) pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-41- 101, et seq. The Trial Court granted Nelson’s ACA motion, and Justice appealed. Having reviewed the evidence, we affirm, albeit for somewhat different reasons than provided by the Trial Court.

This case involves a dispute over recovery under the Tennessee uninsured/underinsured motorist statutory scheme. The plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit against the defendant driver and served notice on their own insurance carrier. The plaintiffs also served notice on the insurance carrier covering the borrowed vehicle that the plaintiffs had been utilizing when the accident occurred. The plaintiffs' insurer entered into a settlement with the plaintiffs for $50,000 each, an amount that equaled the policy limit of the uninsured motorist coverage provided in the policy covering the borrowed vehicle. The defendant driver's insurer also entered into a settlement with the plaintiffs, paying them $30,000 each. The uninsured motorist carrier covering the borrowed vehicle filed a motion for summary judgment. Following a hearing, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurance carrier upon concluding that Tennessee Code Annotated§ 56-7-120l(b)(3)(D) and the policy covering the borrowed vehicle limited the plaintiffs' recovery via judgment to an amount no greater than the policy providing the highest limits of uninsured motorist coverage. Plaintiffs have appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

The trial court granted Appellee/Father’s petition to change his son’s surname from Appellant/Mother’s surname to Father’s. Mother appeals. Because Father did not carry his burden of proof to demonstrate that changing the child’s name is in the child’s best interest, we reverse and remand.

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted review of a range of cases for its next term, which will begin in October. The cases accepted include challenges to the Biden administration’s “ghost gun” regulations, the Food & Drug Administration’s denial of flavored vape products, and a Texas law requiring age verification for online porn sites. The court did not accept a challenge to an Illinois ban on certain semiautomatic guns, safety regulations from the Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA), or a teen sex abuse victim’s attempt to revive a lawsuit against Snapchat. Reuters has more on each of these cases.