LawPay, the leading payment solution trusted by over 115,000 legal professionals, is offering even more ways to simplify your practice’s billing and boost productivity. LawPay now includes new tools for invoicing, time tracking, and contact management, all built into a modern, easy-to-use interface. LawPay is designed to help your firm get paid faster, capture more billable hours, and improve cash flow, allowing you to focus on serving clients and growing your practice. It’s a smarter, more efficient way to manage billing and client information — backed by the security and dependability today’s firms expect. Schedule demo >>

The TBA Young Lawyers Division continued its Exploration Series at Fall Creek Falls State Park in Spencer, one of the state’s scenic natural landmarks. TBA members attended presentations from TBA YLD District Representative Mary Frances DeVoe, as well as John Rice, Thomas Shumate and Joanna McCracken, with Patrick Morrison, the YLD board’s health and wellness coordinator, serving as moderator. The event included a ranger-led hike to the falls and a group lunch. The Exploration Series offers members quality CLE programming in an unplugged, outdoor setting while fostering professional networking. Upcoming events in the series are scheduled at Meeman-Shelby Forest and Long Hunter state parks. See photos from the event.

The TBA Young Lawyers Division will continue its CLE Exploration Series this fall. On Oct. 10 the group will hold a program at Meeman-Shelby Forest State Park outside Memphis, which will also serve as the kick-off to the "Does It Please the Court?" CLE series. The event will return to Middle Tennessee at Long Hunter State Park on April 10, 2026. Don't miss these opportunities to combine learning with nature and networking. 

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. In this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, defendant police officers appeal from the district court’s partial denial of their motion to dismiss on qualified-immunity grounds. Because the complaint adequately states a claim for relief we AFFIRM the district court’s order, and, to the extent the officers ask us to resolve disputed issues of fact, we DISMISS their appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. A district court originally sentenced Leonel Hinojosa to 240 months in prison for shooting a man during a robbery. But we vacated his sentence because the record left unclear whether the court properly used one of Hinojosa’s prior convictions to calculate his guidelines range. See United States v. Hinojosa, 67 F.4th 334, 343–47 (6th Cir. 2023). The court could rely on this prior conviction only if it “resulted in” Hinojosa’s incarceration during “any” time in the 15 years before he committed his current offenses. U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(e)(1). On remand, the government presented additional evidence about Hinojosa’s criminal history. The record now shows that—but for this prior conviction— Hinojosa would have served less time in prison during the guideline’s 15-year “lookback” period. And we hold that this “but for” causal connection between the prior conviction and the extra incarceration satisfies the guideline’s “resulted in” language. Apart from this question, the district court also reasonably sentenced Hinojosa to 240 months due to his history of violence. This time, then, we affirm his sentence.

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. In this interlocutory appeal, Matthew Simon, a local housing-code official, argues that qualified immunity shields him from suit on Belinda Fitzpatrick’s claims under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The district court denied Simon’s motion to dismiss after it determined that, based on the facts alleged, Simon had plausibly violated Fitzpatrick’s clearly established constitutional rights. For the reasons below, we reverse.

The Petitioner, John Patrick Tracy, Jr., pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual battery and two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery, and the trial court imposed the agreed upon effective sentence of fifteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction, followed by an additional fifteen years to be served on Community Corrections. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming that he had received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and that his guilty pleas were not voluntary. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file essential motions, failed to investigate, and misrepresented his legal experience. He also argues that his guilty pleas were unknowingly and involuntarily entered. He further contends that the cumulative effect of his attorney’s errors entitles him to relief. After review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment.

The Petitioner, Douglas E. Alvey, appeals from the denial of his petition seeking post- conviction relief from his conviction of first degree murder. On appeal, he argues: (1) trial counsel were ineffective in failing to present expert testimony negating the mens rea; and (2) that he did not knowingly understand the nature of his constitutional right to testify at trial. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The trial court dismissed this case without prejudice after determining that the plaintiff failed to properly respond to the defendant’s discovery requests for over a year despite multiple extensions. We affirm.

A mother appeals from the trial court’s decision regarding custody of her two minor children. However, because the mother filed a motion to recuse the trial court judge on which he failed to rule before entering a final order on the merits of the case, the judgment of the trial court must be vacated and remanded for further proceedings.