The Kingsport Senior Center and Legal Aid of East Tennessee (LAET) will host a free legal clinic to help older adults complete powers of attorney on Sept. 18. The event will take place from 2-4 p.m. EDT at the senior center’s office, 1200 E. Center St., Suite 121, Kingsport 37660. Attendees will meet with lawyers who will assist in completing necessary legal forms. Pre-registration is required by Sept. 4 to attend. Contact LAET at 423-928-8311 or click here for more information.

General, Solo & Small Firm Section members have access to quality TBA CLE programming that can be purchased using a section member discount. Join colleagues for any of these upcoming forums this fall: Adoption Law Forum, Creditors Practice Forum, Animal Law Forum or the Disability Law Forum. Next week, learn more about estate planning while working on your golf skills at the Estate Planning Tee-off at Topgolf. Or, later this month, tune in for a Rookie Series webcast Making the Most of Mediation, a program that will provide practical guidance for lawyers to prepare themselves and their clients for mediation. Looking for something else? Check out the TBA CLE catalog to find more courses focused on the needs of solo and small firm practitioners!

Retired Rutherford County lawyer Allen D. Hale died Aug. 23 at age 73. A lifelong resident of the county, he worked as paramedic, police detective, assistant district attorney and private practice attorney. Condolences for the family may be shared online at www.jenningsandayers.com.

Georgia lawyer Stephen William Mooney was reinstated to the practice of law in Tennessee on Aug. 27. The Tennessee Supreme Court reports that Mooney has been on inactive status since May 11, 2018. The Board of Professional Responsibility found that Mooney’s petition for reinstatement was satisfactory, and he had met all requirements for reinstatement.

The pro se Petitioner, Marcus Wilson, appeals from the habeas corpus court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We affirm the summary dismissal of the petition.

Defendant, Marty Ray Rouse, appeals the trial court’s judgment revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his full sentence in confinement after Defendant admitted to violating his probation. Defendant asserts the trial court abused its discretion by focusing on Defendant’s past criminal history and failing to apply the correct legal standard in determining the consequence of Defendant’s probation violation. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The appellants, Justin Tyler Hobbs, Kasey Hobbs, Janice Toth, and Tony Toth (“Appellants”), filed a notice of appeal with this Court on June 4, 2025, which states that Appellants are appealing the May 5, 2025 order of the Hamilton County Circuit Court (“Trial Court”). Appellants subsequently filed in this Court a notice of premature appeal due to a pending issue regarding attorney’s fees and legal expenses after the dismissal of Appellants’ claims upon a directed verdict under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 50.01. According to the notice, the pending issue of attorney’s fees was scheduled to be resolved during a hearing on August 7, 2025. Therefore, this Court provided the parties with an extension of time to obtain a final judgment until August 21, 2025 or else this appeal would be subject to dismissal for lack of a final judgment.

Because no final order has been entered in the underlying trial court proceedings, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

A mother appeals the trial court’s entry of a parenting plan that designates her and her former spouse joint primary residential parents and grants them equal residential parenting time. Because the parties did not agree to be joint primary residential parents, we modify the parenting plan to name the mother primary residential parent. Otherwise, we affirm.

This appeal concerns Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 8, Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5(e), an ethics rule requiring that a division of fees between lawyers who are not in the same firm be agreed to by the client in writing. Trinity Clark (“Clark”) entered into a retainer agreement with attorney Troy Jones (“Jones”) on a 1/3 contingency fee. Jones brought Clark’s matter to attorney Lance Baker (“Baker”), who was not in a firm with Jones. Clark later entered an agreement with Baker on a 45% contingency fee. The Clark-Baker agreement provided, in writing, that Baker could associate other attorneys on the case, but that Clark’s overall fee obligation would not increase. The agreement neither identified any other attorneys nor specified how fees would be divided between them. After Clark’s case settled, Clark sued Baker in the Circuit Court for Knox County (“the Trial Court”), alleging Baker’s fee was unreasonable. Jones joined the lawsuit, arguing he was entitled to a share of the fees (“Plaintiffs,” Jones and Clark collectively). Baker filed a motion for summary judgment. The Trial Court denied Baker’s motion, finding that both the Clark-Jones agreement and the Clark-Baker agreement were invalid for noncompliance with Rule 1.5(e). This interlocutory appeal followed. We find the Clark-Jones agreement invalid. However, with respect to the Clark-Baker agreement, we find that the entire arrangement and Clark’s assent thereto satisfied Rule 1.5(e). We reverse on this issue and find that the Clark-Baker agreement is not invalid for failure of compliance with Rule 1.5(e). We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.