The Elizabethton Star reports that Judge Zachary R. Walden has received the 2025 Pride of ETSU Award. The award recognizes Walden's commitment to integrity, service and justice in Tennessee’s 8th Judicial District.  Walden, a 2013 graduate of ETSU, is currently the youngest trial judge in the state and has served on the criminal and recovery courts since 2022. In 2024, he launched the 8th Judicial District Veterans Treatment Court, expanding support for veterans in Campbell, Claiborne, Fentress, Scott and Union counties. Throughout his career, Walden has held numerous leadership positions, including membership on the Tennessee Supreme Court’s Technology Oversight Committee and as chair of the Tennessee Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction Committee. He also teaches criminal practice skills at Lincoln Memorial University’s Duncan School of Law. Previously, Walden practiced law in Knoxville at Eldridge & Blakney, with appearances on “Killer Cases” and “Court Cam Presents: Under Oath.” He received his law degree from the University of Alabama School of Law in 2016, earning multiple academic honors. Walden has been recognized with the American Bar Association’s On the Rise Award, Knoxville News Sentinel’s 40 Under 40, and the University of Alabama School of Law’s Rising Young Lawyer Award. He lives in Jacksboro and remains active in his community and church. Walden serves as the secretary of the TBA Young Lawyers Division Board as well as the co-chair of the Rural Judicial Fellowship program.

From Lennon and McCartney to Jagger and Richards, the greatest rock and roll collaborations offer more than unforgettable music—they reveal the dynamics of trust, communication and ethical boundaries that are just as vital in the practice of law. Join the CLE Performer, Stuart Teicher, on Dec. 26 at 3 p.m. CST for a CLE program that connects the Rules of Professional Conduct to real-world examples from legendary rock partnerships. Explore how these iconic collaborations can teach attorneys about managing conflicts of interest, maintaining competence and fostering effective communication. Get ready to learn ethical lessons that will leave you humming a better tune in your legal practice. For more information and to register, visit the TBA website.

CLAY, Circuit Judge. Defendants Cedric Swanagan and Courtland Reed appeal from their convictions and sentences for possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii), and 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM Defendants’ convictions, AFFIRM Swanagan’s sentence, VACATE Reed’s sentence, and REMAND to the district court to resentence Reed.

Defendant, Rikiya Joy Parks, appeals her Hawkins County Criminal Court jury convictions for aggravated child neglect, making a false report, and child abuse, challenging the admission of photographs of the minor victim, the admission of what she claims was improper character evidence, the exclusion of printed screenshots of Facebook messages, the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, and the imposition of consecutive sentences. Following our review, we affirm.

The Defendant, Taivaun Marquise Mallory, appeals his Montgomery County Circuit Court conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, for which he received a sentence of twelve years’ incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress a firearm recovered after a traffic stop and that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction. Discerning no error, we affirm.

TBA staff enjoyed their annual holiday party earlier this month and wish all TBA members a happy holiday season! The TBA will be closed Wednesday and Thursday in observance of the Christmas holiday. Offices will reopen Friday at 8 a.m. CST. Online CLE programming will remain available throughout the holidays.

A jury convicted Defendant, Stanley William Havens, of driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI) and of driving with a blood alcohol concentration of .08% or higher (DUI per se), and it found that this was Defendant’s third DUI offense for enhanced sentencing. The offenses were merged, and Defendant was assessed a fine and sentenced to serve 11 months and 29 days in confinement, with a release eligibility of 75%. Defendant appeals, challenging: (1) the sufficiency of the evidence; (2) the redacted video of the traffic stop; (3) the trial court’s failure to excuse a juror for cause; (4) a statement during voir dire that he asserts constitutes prosecutorial misconduct; and (5) his sentence. We affirm and remand for entry of a corrected judgments in Counts 2 and 3.

A Knox County Jury convicted Defendant, Tyler Christian, of two counts of carjacking and one count of driving on a revoked license. The trial court merged the carjacking convictions and imposed an effective sentence of sixteen years’ confinement as a Range II offender. On appeal, Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions, the trial court’s decision to supplement the pattern jury instructions with definitions of “force” and “violence,” and the trial court’s denial of Defendant’s motion for new trial. After review, we affirm.

The parties obtained a divorce in the Chancery Court for Montgomery County (“the Trial Court”). On appeal, the wife disputes the Trial Court’s calculation of her portion of the husband’s military retirement pay. Upon our review, we determine that the Trial Court miscalculated the wife’s portion given that it calculated her portion based on the parties’ date of informal separation, rather than the date of the husband’s retirement from the military. In doing so, the Trial Court misclassified marital property as separate property. We, accordingly, vacate the Trial Court’s classification of the husband’s military retirement pay as partially separate property acquired during the marriage and the Trial Court’s division of the entire marital estate, insofar as the Trial Court’s improper classification of this marital asset affects the equitable division of the marital estate as a whole. We remand this cause to the Trial Court for it to properly classify the husband’s military retirement pay as marital property acquired during the months of the marriage, recalculate its division of this marital asset, and re-access its division of the entire marital estate in light of its reclassification and recalculation of its division of this marital asset.

After discovering that the roof of her new car leaked, the owner returned to the dealership several times for repairs, but the leaks persisted. Later, when she began feeling sick, the owner suspected that mold growing in the car was the cause. The owner sued the dealership claiming, among other things, that negligent repairs led to the mold growth and caused her health issues. The dealership moved for summary judgment, asserting that the owner could not prove causation. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment. We affirm.