It's not too late to join your colleagues in Nashville next Friday for the TBA's 2026 Construction Law Forum. The program, tailored to both new and experienced practitioners, will feature a morning session focused on introductory sessions that build foundational knowledge and an afternoon sessions delving into more advanced issues. The morning session will feature presentations on preserving and enforcing lien rights, reviewing recent case law developments and avoiding common construction law mistakes. The afternoon session will include presentations on payment obligations, statutory compliance under the Prompt Pay Act, the growing role of artificial intelligence in construction projects and legal practice, and ethics considerations unique to construction law practitioners. Register now for the full day program, morning session or afternoon session.

Great! You're thinking of becoming a mentor. Now what? “WIIFM” stands for “What’s in it for me?” Did you think we would start off with some high-sounding rhetoric? Well, we're not.

Before you start out, why not reflect on why you want to be a mentor and what you hope to get from the experience? For ideas, see the bullet points below.

I’m looking forward to mentoring because:

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

• Friendship
• Opportunity to teach material I know and am interested in
• Giving back
• Insight into the new generation of lawyers
• Share in the excitement of a new lawyer finding their “style”
• Pride in a new lawyer’s accomplishments
• Discover new things about myself
• See the profession – what’s right about it and where we need to improve – through fresh eyes
• Get a chance to use strengths in new ways
• Learn some new things
• Never hurts to go back to the basics

Provided by TBA Mentoring Committee, November 2025

Robert Boyd wanted to exit from his company. In 2019, he had sold a majority stake in Northern Biomedical Research, Inc. (“NBR”) to the individual defendants in this case: Shane Woods, Dean Haan, Joshua Bartoe, and Mark Johnson. He retained a 16% stake in the business but had moved from its headquarters in Michigan to a ranch in Idaho and had grown increasingly frustrated with the management of the company that he started several decades earlier. At the same time, the individual defendants were seeking to expand. NBR lacked the cash or revenue to fund that expansion, so the defendants began exploring a potential loan, and they also considered equity financing options. But they told Boyd little or nothing about these efforts, particularly with respect to the company’s interest in equity financing and early overtures from Avista Capital Partners, LLP (“Avista”), the venture capital firm that would wind up taking a 50% stake in NBR.

Boyd sold his shares in December 2020 for about $3.4 million, an amount based on an agreed-upon accounting firm’s annual valuation of NBR at roughly $21 million. The next spring, Avista and NBR entered an agreement for a capital infusion of $40 million, thus valuing the company at $80 million. Unhappy that he sold his stake in NBR for less than he might have later received, Boyd sued the company and the individual defendants, alleging that their failure to inform him about their discussions with Avista or the fact that NBR was considering private-equity financing violated securities law and breached the defendants’ fiduciary duties under Michigan common law. After discovery, the district court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all counts. This appeal followed.

We hold that the district court did not err when it granted summary judgment on Boyd’s securities-law claims. But because it applied an incorrect legal standard under Michigan common law, a genuine dispute of material fact remains as to whether Boyd is entitled to relief on Counts III, IV, and V of his second amended complaint. We therefore affirm in part and reverse in part.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has issued two orders announcing amendments to the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rules of Criminal Procedure. The appellate package would affect Rules 20B “Public Access To Appellate Court Filings And Privacy Protection” and 27 “Content of Briefs” while the criminal package would impact Rule 41 “Search And Seizure.” Amendments will take effect July 1 subject to approval by the General Assembly.

Republican state lawmakers have announced a wide-ranging immigration package that seeks to make Tennessee a model for immigration crackdowns across the country. According to The Tennessean, leaders announced a package of about 10 bills that include those requiring state and local governments to verify individuals' legal status before distributing food assistance and housing benefits, tracking grade school students' immigration status, offering driver's tests in English only and criminalizing being present in the state after a final deportation order has been entered. The effort is aimed at "preserving legal immigration" while "protecting tax dollars, reducing fraud and ending sanctuary loopholes," said House Speaker Cameron Sexton, R-Crossville. At a press conference announcing the measures, Sexton thanked the White House, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and President Donald Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller for their collaboration of the legislation. In response to the announcement, Senate Democratic Leader Raumesh Akbari, D-Memphis, criticized the federal immigration system and said the legislature should prioritize lowering grocery and child care costs. The paper has a breakdown of the proposals.

A settlement has been reached in a lawsuit filed by the family of Anthony Thompson Jr., who was killed by a Knoxville police officer in 2021. According to Knox News, Thompson was 17 years old when he was shot and killed by an officer inside an Austin-East Magnet High School bathroom. The lawsuit by his family centered on the claim that officers failed to provide sufficient medical care to the dying teenager. Other claims previously were thrown out by the courts. The settlement ends a lengthy court battle weeks before a scheduled federal trial but still must be approved by a judge.

New data from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is raising questions about how DUI arrests are handled across the state after hundreds of drivers arrested for driving under the influence later tested with no alcohol or drugs in their systems. News Channel 5 reports that out of nearly 17,000 blood samples taken in 2024, 419 cases — about 2.5% — came back with zero alcohol or other intoxicants detected. Criminal defense attorney Ben Raybin tells the news channel that a woman he is representing is not “an isolated phenomenon.” We are “seeing hundreds throughout the state.” Compounding the situation is that by the time toxicology results are returned, the consequences of an arrest can already be severe. Raybin says changes are needed in how DUI investigations are conducted in the field.

This appeal concerns a dismissal for lack of service of process. The trial court determined that appellant failed to properly effectuate service and comply with Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Knox County Commissioner Larsen Jay has proposed overhauling the structure of the troubled Richard L. Bean Juvenile Detention Center to change its mission and who oversees it. According to Knox News, the proposal would turn the center into a judicial model designed to make teens successful contributors to their communities instead of focusing on incarceration and punishment. The detention center would be overseen by Knox County's juvenile court judge, ending any plans to put it under the sheriff's office. Jay unveiled the plan at a Knox County Juvenile Service Center Board of Directors meeting this week. The paper reports that the board voted unanimously to send the proposal to the Knox County Commission. The proposal is supported by Juvenile Court Judge Tim Irwin and by Knox County Mayor Glenn Jacobs.

In this parental termination case, the trial court found that one ground for termination of the mother’s parental rights had been proven by clear and convincing evidence but failed to make findings of fact to support this conclusion. We vacate and remand for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by statute.