In this post-divorce action, the wife, Ann L. Shoemake (“Wife”), filed a petition against the husband, Ronald L. Shoemake (“Husband”), in the Sumner County Chancery Court (“trial court”) to receive her marital share of Husband’s pension payments through the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (“TCRS”). Wife had been awarded a portion of Husband’s TCRS payments in the final decree of divorce (“Final Decree”). Husband filed a counter-petition seeking, inter alia, a reduction of his alimony in futuro obligation. After the trial court entered a judgment in favor of Wife for her portion of his TCRS payments, Husband unilaterally ceased paying his alimony in futuro obligation to Wife and failed to pay the court-ordered TCRS arrearages. This caused Wife to file two motions for contempt against Husband, one in February 2024 and the other in August 2024. In the February 2024 motion, Wife requested that the trial court find Husband in “willful contempt” until he purged himself of the TCRS shortage and alimony arrearage. On March 4, 2024, the trial court ordered Husband to pay the TCRS shortage and ruled that Husband should continue to pay the $600.00 monthly alimony but declined to rule on the motion for contempt, stating that the court “reserves the issue of granting a judgment pending the approval of the QDRO to be submitted.” Despite the trial court’s ruling, Husband did not resume his alimony payments and did not comply fully with the order concerning his TCRS obligation, and Wife accordingly filed a second motion for contempt in August 2024. In that motion, Wife requested that the trial court find Husband “in civil contempt for his failure to make payments for [Wife’s] share of TCRS up to August 14, 2024, alimony payments to date of $600.00 per month, and judgment be granted accordingly.” The trial court entered an order on October 9, 2024, granting to Wife a judgment of “$4,812.75 to be paid within 30 days” for Husband’s TCRS obligation and arrearage, but the trial court did not specifically address Wife’s two motions for contempt or her request for alimony arrearage. On October 11, 2024, the trial court entered a second order, denying Husband’s request for a reduction of alimony and granting to Wife her attorney’s fees as the prevailing party pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-5-103(c). Again, the trial court did not address Wife’s motions for contempt or her request for alimony arrearage. Husband has appealed. Because the trial court did not fully rule on Wife’s outstanding motions for contempt and did not render a decision regarding Wife’s request for an alimony arrearage in the amount of $3,000.00, there is no final judgment entered by the trial court, and this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and remand the case to the trial court for further action.

The trial court awarded attorney’s fees as sanctions against a petitioner and his attorney in this ouster proceeding, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 8-47-122(b), following a voluntary nonsuit of the petition. The trial court based its award of sanctions upon, inter alia, its determination that the petition’s allegations were unsupported and that the petitioner’s attorney had acted recklessly when filing the petition by purporting to represent individuals with whom he had neither met nor spoken. The petitioner and his counsel have appealed. Upon review, we affirm the trial court’s award of sanctions against counsel, but we vacate the court’s award of sanctions against the individual petitioner. We decline to award additional attorney’s fees on appeal.

A complaint for ouster was filed nominally on behalf of the Shelby County Attorney against Shelby County Clerk Wanda Halbert. The defendant clerk filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the plaintiff lacked standing because the complaint was being prosecuted by a deputy county attorney and outside counsel due to a personal conflict of interest by the named county attorney. The plaintiff then filed a motion for default judgment, arguing that a motion to dismiss was not a proper pleading under the ouster statutes. The trial court denied the motion for default judgment and permitted the defendant clerk to file an answer. The trial court then dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to the plaintiff’s lack of standing. We affirm the denial of the motion for default judgment, reverse the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and remand for further proceedings.

This case originated as a breach of contract action for the sale of a business. Eventually, the parties entered into a settlement agreement in which the defendants agreed to pay $1,000,000.00 by a specified date. A few days before the deadline, the defendants attempted to gain an extension and/or renegotiate the terms. The negotiations did not result in written modification of the settlement agreement, the defendants failed to pay the agreed-upon sum by the deadline, and the plaintiff sued to enforce the settlement agreement. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, finding that there was no meeting of the minds as to modification, no written modification, and no breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. The defendants appeal only the claim that the plaintiff did not breach the duty of good faith and fair dealing. We affirm the decision of the trial court and award the plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to the settlement agreement.

Judge Kenny Armstrong, one of three Black judges among Tennessee’s 24 intermediate appellate judges, will retire from the Court of Appeals in February. The Governor’s Council for Judicial Appointments is accepting applications for his seat through Nov. 5. A Tipton County native and Duke Law graduate, Armstrong previously served in the Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Corps, as a federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C. and as clerk and master of the Shelby County Chancery Court before his 2014 appointment to the appellate bench, The Tennessee Journal reports. Armstrong dissented in a 2-1 decision in June that upheld a state law cutting the size of the Nashville Metro Council in half. He argued that the article in the Tennessee Constitution establishing that county commissions can have no more than 25 members specifically does not apply to merged city-county governments like the one in Nashville, which has 40 members.

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals has upheld Cleotha Abston’s 2024 conviction for raping Memphis woman Alicia Franklin in 2021, The Daily Memphian reports. Abston, who also pleaded guilty to the 2022 murder of schoolteacher Eliza Fletcher, was sentenced to 80 years in prison for the rape. His attorney had appealed, arguing the trial judge erred by allowing the jury to see a photo of the gun Abston used, which was recovered a year later. Judge Steven Sword, writing for the court, said the gun was relevant because each charge required Abston to have a firearm at the time of the crime. Read the appellate court opinion.

8th Circuit Judge Duane Benton will step back from active service, giving President Donald Trump the opportunity to fill another seat on the federal appeals court. He appointed four judges to the court during his first term. Benton notified the White House in an Oct. 24 letter of his plans to take senior status once a successor is confirmed, Bloomberg Law reports. He said he plans “to continue to render substantial judicial service as a senior judge.”

U.S. senators, including Tennessee's Marsha Blackburn, are backing legislation that would fund uninterrupted Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits through 2026, even if the government shutdown continues. Last week, Gov. Bill Lee said the state will not be able to cover lost federal SNAP benefits. According to Knox News, on Oct. 27 the U.S. Department of Agriculture said it would not use contingency funds to reload beneficiaries’ grocery cards. Last week, Tennessee lawmakers urged Lee to call a special legislative session to address the lack of federal funding during the shutdown as 690,000 Tennesseans are set to lose SNAP or other benefits. 

The TBA and West Tennessee Legal Services (WTLS) will present a free webcast, “Building Better Boards: Ethical Considerations and Dilemmas for Attorneys on Nonprofit Boards,” on Dec. 10 from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. CST. The program will cover ethical boundaries for attorneys serving on boards, questions to consider before joining and real-world conflicts of interest. Panelists include Rita Gibson Rayford with Strategic Legal Advocates, Claudia Williams Hyman with WTLS, Brande Boyd with Butler Snow, Seth Ogden with Patterson Intellectual Property Law, and Harolda Bryson, an attorney for the City of Chattanooga. Registration is free and 1.5 hours of CLE credit is available for a $50 processing fee. Visit the TBA website for more information and to register.

Four Black staff members of Fayette County Public Schools have filed a lawsuit against the board of education and county over alleged discrimination. The lawsuit was filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. According to the Commercial Appeal, the lawsuit claims that Black staff members were subjected to adverse employment actions, including demotions and salary reductions, while non-Black employees would not endure similar adverse employment actions. The four plaintiffs request a jury trial and are seeking reinstatement to their former positions, along with compensatory damages for lost wages.