You might think your voice will not make a difference, but think again. Over the years, a small group of judges and lawyers who cared about the state of the law in family cases wanted to change the laws. We encourage you to get involved in the section where you practice because you may not realize that a few people can impact and improve the laws.

Each section of the TBA has an executive committee or council. The Family Law Section is unique because it had an executive council and a “Code Commission.”  The Code Commission, formed in the early 1990s, was comprised of law professors, judges and lawyers who saw the need to change the status quo and be proactive with family law legislation. The members practiced throughout the state and were dedicated to meeting once every other month on Sunday afternoons at the TBA headquarters, then a house on West End Avenue, to discuss, deliberate and draft legislation for the TBA to consider. The members arrived around lunchtime with their codes, treatises and relevant research to spend three hours discussing the family law trends of the country, statutes of other states and how to improve the family law statutes in our state.

The Code Commission was initially formed under the leadership of the TBA president, and some of the original members included attorney Mary Frances Lyle, Judge Jim Martin, Judge Don Ash, Judge Connie Clark, Jean Crowe, professor Janet Richards, Amy J. Amundsen, Sarah Sheppeard and Jocie Wurzburg. Attorney Mary Francis Lyle was chair and would report the Code Commission’s proposed legislation or comments on bills to the Family Law Section Executive Council. After the executive council discussed and voted on the proposals, they were provided to the TBA leadership and the TBA lobbyist, Steve Cobb. Some of the significant pieces of family law legislation passed in the last 30 years have been attributed to the hard work of the Code Commission.

The members of the Code Commission saw a need to reduce costs to the litigants, reduce the judge’s time devoted to ex parte injunctions and reduce the level of animosity between two highly charged parties. Before 2001, practitioners who filed a complaint for divorce for their clients had to file for ex parte injunctive relief and recite in the complaint the “bad acts” of the other party, which heightened the level of animosity between the parties. The party then addressed the court with a request that the other party should not, in part, dissipate marital assets, threaten their spouse or make disparaging remarks about them in front of the children or to their employer, relocate out of state with the child during the pending of the divorce or drop them from insurance policies. After studying the statutes of other states, this group drafted what is known as the “Temporary Mutual Injunction.”[1] The statute has been updated to include hiding, destroying or spoiling any evidence electronically stored, and discussions are ongoing to expand the temporary injunctions consistent with new technologies and actions of the parties.[2]

When interest groups such as the Dads Against Discrimination (DADs) advocated for the presumption of joint custody, Circuit Court Judge Don Ash testified before the legislature against the presumption of joint custody. Judge Ash was writing his thesis on parenting plans modeled after the Washington state statutes. Through efforts of the Code Commission and others, the legislature adopted the “Parenting Plan” statute after a one-year pilot project.[3] The Parenting Plan and its requirements offer a different approach to dispute resolution in child custody and visitation matters.[4]

When companies offered their employees new financial products and those employees divorced, there was little guidance on classifying, valuing and distributing those assets. The Code Commission members reviewed the laws and cases in other states and drafted amendments to enlarge the definition of marital property to include stock options, whether vested and unvested, retirement benefits, and other employment-related benefits that accrued during the marriage.[5] The group clarified the definition of substantial contributions by a spouse to the separate assets of the other spouse to provide a roadmap for practitioners and judges when deciding these issues and drafted language consistent with case law on the dissipation of assets.[6]

Mary Francis Lyle and the late professor Janet Richards lobbied the Code Commission to add transitional alimony, the support awarded when the spouse did not need to be rehabilitated but needed financial assistance to transition from being married to a single life. From their efforts and those of the Code Commission, a fourth type of alimony was available for the courts to consider when determining the issue of alimony, along with a new alimony statute that clearly defined each type, duration, modifiability and other facets.[7] This statute reiterated that a homemaker or parent is of equal dignity and importance as economic contributions to the marriage, explained the need for a comparable standard of living post-divorce, and clearly defined the four types of alimony.[8]

This group drafted the Parental Relocation statute[9], which was enacted because custodial parents were moving out of state with their children, and the law at that time permitted them to relocate with their child without determining whether the other parent had substantial involvement in the child’s life. This Parental Relocation statute provided guidance to the parents and courts on the standards and burdens of proof needed to oppose a relocation with the child by the custodial parent. However, in 2018, the statute was amended not to consider the parents' involvement before the court determines whether the move is in the child’s best interest.[10]

After Lyle’s retirement, attorney Jeffrey Levy became the chair of the Code Commission, and further developments occurred, including addressing the mental health records of parents going through a divorce. Through the efforts of the Code Commission, the group proposed language to amend the custody statute to provide guidance on the request of Rule 35 mental evaluation, the release of mental health records during a custody case, and the dissemination of the records through a protective order.[11]

After Levy retired, attorney Jason Hicks became the chair of the Code Commission. In 2020, the Code Commission was dismantled, and the Family Law Section Executive Council (EC) absorbed its duties. Attorney Siew Ling Shea is the legislative liaison between the EC and the TBA, specifically, the association's government affairs team of Ashley Harbin, Brad Lampley and Berkley Schwartz. The EC is comprised of judges and lawyers, and the council meets virtually once or twice a month to assist the team with bills filed in the legislature and, at times, provide proposed legislation for the TBA leadership to consider. 

In 2021, the EC drafted property and alimony statute amendments. Its members saw a need to provide the courts with guidance and flexibility in allocating responsibility for paying marital debt, including attorney’s fees and expenses incurred in a divorce proceeding. By codifying the factors used to distribute marital debt enunciated in the Tennessee Supreme Court case, defining marital debt and separate debt, and codifying the factors provided in the Tennessee Supreme Court Rule in awarding attorney fees and suit expenses in divorce cases, litigants now realize that even when they are separated, the debts incurred, including their attorney’s fees and suit expenses, are marital and seeking attorney’s fees will require added measures.[12] The amendments require litigants to divulge the amount paid in fees, sources of fees, reasonableness and necessity of fees as an additional factor for the court in distributing property and in awarding attorney’s fees and suit expenses.[13]

The Code Commission and now the EC are asked to comment on many bills and rules related to family law. Throughout the years, the Code Commission and EC have remarked on the original child support guidelines and its amendments, grandparent visitation statute, Rule 40A, and more recently, a proposed new best-interest factor and training for guardians ad litem.

We would appreciate your involvement and input. Getting involved builds networking opportunities and enhances your legal skills and knowledge. Reach out to Section Chair K.O. Herston to volunteer and help to improve the practice. The Family Law Section also needs volunteers to research, write and continue to publish the Alimony Bench Book, a treatise in existence for 24 years; write articles for the Family Law Connect e-newsletter; review bills, research other states’ statutes and case law and draft legislation; and educate the public and legislature about specific areas of the law. Many more hands and minds may help us accomplish more. No matter what practice area you are involved in, TBA sections are essential to improving law practice in Tennessee. Your voice and actions can make a difference!

Amy J. Amundsen is an experienced family law litigator, and now provides attorneys with virtual legal and business consulting services. She also offers mentoring and coaching for attorneys to enhance their legal career, as well as office management services.  

Amundsen has a virtual collaborative divorce practice and is a member of the Memphis Collaborative Alliance (MCA) and the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP). With her many years of experience litigating and working with professionals from other disciplines, she provides her collaborative clients insightful advice and recommendations to meet their interests. She is a diplomate in the American College of Family Trial Lawyers (ACFTL), an organization limited to the top 100 divorce lawyers in the U.S., and is a fellow in both the International Academy of Family Lawyers (IAFL) and American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML). Amundsen serves on the Tennessee Bar Association Family Law Section Executive Council where she assists in drafting family law legislation and from 2001-2021 assisted in the annual publication of the Tennessee Bar Association Alimony Bench Book distributed to Tennessee judges and lawyers.

She also is a Rule 31 family law mediator and a family law arbitrator, trained through the AAML. Amundsen currently serves as co-chair of the AAML Arbitration Committee and member of the AAML Continuing Legal Education, Legislation, and Collaborative and Mediation committees. She has served as the president of the following organizations: Memphis Bar Association, Leo Bearman Sr. American Inn of Court, The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law Alumni Chapter, and Tennessee and Memphis Bar Association Family Law sections (two terms). She also has served as chair of the Memphis Area Legal Services Campaign and the 2019 University of Memphis Law Pillars of Excellence.

Judge James G. Martin III served two terms as 21st Judicial District Circuit Court Judge in Williamson County, Tennessee. Prior to taking the bench, Martin graduated with honors from Vanderbilt University in 1971 after a distinguished undergraduate career and service in the United States Army.  Martin then practiced law in middle Tennessee from 1974 to 2008, primarily focusing on civil litigation with an emphasis on family law.  

While sitting as judge in Williamson County, Martin continued to serve his community through work on several task forces with the Tennessee Bar Association and the state of Tennessee. Notably, he worked to revise the statutes and rules that govern the practice marriage and family law. He also served as presiding judge for the 21st Judicial District Recovery Court from 2014-2022. Since returning to private practice, Martin has resumed his focus on general civil and family law matters and has established a strong mediation practice as a Licensed Rule 31 Mediator.

The March/April issue of the Tennessee Bar Journal is now available online! The cover story by mentor and mentee pair Buck Lewis and Brock Willis offers a proactive, strategic approach that emphasizes regular engagement and long-term growth rather than reactive crisis management. In her President's Perspective column, Heidi Barcus also encourages lawyers to mentor others, not only because it strengthens the profession, but also because it strengthens the community. A feature story by Daniel Horwitz on waiver rules in Tennessee appellate procedures and columns on TLAP's 2025 annual report, competency to stand trial and Elvis' autopsy cases offer a wide variety of reading on topics of interest to Tennessee lawyers. Also get an update from the Drowota Trust and news from the TBA, including new leadership coming in 2028 and an update on construction at the new TBA office.

Elder Law Basics 2026, a virtual CLE program designed for attorneys new to elder law or seeking a refresher, will take place on April 10 from 10 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. CDT. The program will cover key aspects of elder law, with experienced practitioners providing insights on recent developments and best practices. Registrants will receive connection details and course materials the week of the event. For information and to register visit the TBA website.

At its winter meeting last month, the TBA Board of Governors announced a vacancy in two board positions: West Tennessee Grand Division Governor (a one-year term) and 7th District Governor (a three-year term). The 7th District includes the counties of Benton, Carroll, Chester, Crockett, Decatur, Dyer, Fayette, Gibson, Hardeman, Hardin, Haywood, Henderson, Henry, Lake, Lauderdale, McNairy, Madison, Obion, Tipton and Weakley. To be considered for either of these positions, email a statement of interest and resume to TBA Executive Director Sheree Wright at barED@tnbar.org by March 3. The board will consider nominees at its March meeting. Read more about the 2026-2027 election on the TBA website.

The TBA Today issue sent earlier this evening contained incorrect information about the current open positions on the TBA Board of Governors. At its winter meeting last month, the board announced a vacancy in two board positions: West Tennessee Grand Division Governor (a one-year term) and 7th District Governor (a three-year term). The 7th District includes the counties of Benton, Carroll, Chester, Crockett, Decatur, Dyer, Fayette, Gibson, Hardeman, Hardin, Haywood, Henderson, Henry, Lake, Lauderdale, McNairy, Madison, Obion, Tipton and Weakley. To be considered for either of these positions, email a statement of interest and resume to TBA Executive Director Sheree Wright at barED@tnbar.org by March 3. The board will consider nominees at its March meeting. Read more about the 2026-2027 election on the TBA website.

The March/April issue of the Tennessee Bar Journal is now available online! The cover story by mentor and mentee pair Buck Lewis and Brock Willis offers a proactive, strategic approach that emphasizes regular engagement and long-term growth rather than reactive crisis management. In her President's Perspective column, Heidi Barcus also encourages lawyers to mentor others, not only because it strengthens the profession, but also because it strengthens the community. A feature story by Daniel Horwitz on waiver rules in Tennessee appellate procedures and columns on TLAP's 2025 annual report, competency to stand trial and Elvis' autopsy cases offer a wide variety of reading on topics of interest to Tennessee lawyers. Also get an update from the Drowota Trust and news from the TBA, including new leadership coming in 2028 and an update on construction at the new TBA office.

DAVIS, Circuit Judge. Scott Williams filed this action against Addison Community Schools and the then-superintendent of the School District plus five members of the School Board in their individual and official capacities. On appeal, Williams challenges the district court’s denial of his partial motion for summary judgment as to his constitutional tort claim under the Fair and Just Treatment clause of the Michigan constitution, and he challenges its grant of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to that same claim. For the reasons stated below, we vacate the district court’s decision and remand.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. Federal law allows a “prevailing party” to seek reimbursement for attorney’s fees in suits against a federal agency unless the agency’s “position” was “substantially justified.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). This case asks whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was “substantially justified” in treating rifles fitted with bump stocks as illegal “machineguns.” In 2017, the ATF departed from its long-held view on the legality of bump stocks. Its new interpretation produced a flood of litigation. Eventually, a circuit split led the Supreme Court to resolve this question against the ATF. See Garland v. Cargill, 602 U.S. 406, 415 (2024). The district court in this case nevertheless found the ATF’s reading substantially justified and so refused to award attorney’s fees to the challengers. We must give deference to the district court’s finding. And the court acted reasonably because of the substantial judicial disagreement that this novel legal question produced. We thus affirm.

DAVIS, Circuit Judge. In March 2022, police handcuffed and detained Ryan Franke outside a local recreational center on suspicion of domestic violence against his ex-wife. After handcuffing Franke, Officer Kenny Janes escorted him toward a police vehicle. During the walk to the vehicle, Franke yelled out to nearby family members, which led Janes to apply pain compliance techniques to keep Franke moving. Later, Janes allegedly twisted Franke’s wrist, causing injury. Franke brought this civil rights action, claiming that Janes used excessive force. The district court found that Janes is protected by qualified immunity and granted him summary judgment on that basis. Because there is a genuine dispute of material fact concerning the need for the amount of force applied, we AFFIRM IN PART, REVERSE IN PART, and REMAND for further proceedings.

JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. Rihanna Buddi pleaded guilty to failure to register as a sex offender in violation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). In advance of sentencing, and over Buddi’s objection, the district court classified her as a Tier II sex offender under SORNA. She was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment, followed by twenty years of supervised release, which was fifteen years over the applicable advisory Guidelines range of five years flat. Because we find that Buddi is a Tier I offender under SORNA and that the district court erred procedurally in imposing her twenty-year term of supervised release, we REVERSE the district court’s ruling on Buddi’s objection regarding her SORNA classification, VACATE her supervised release sentence, and REMAND for resentencing.