A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Ralphelle Antre James, of second degree murder, unlawful possession of a weapon by a convicted felon, and felony reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective thirty-six years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant raises two related issues. First, he asserts that the trial court improperly denied his motion to continue the trial to investigate a late-added witness. He also argues that the trial court erred in allowing the late-added witness to testify, contending that the testimony violated Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b) and denied him a fair trial. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Plaintiff appeals the denial of her motion to recuse the trial court judge, which raised allegations of bias related to, inter alia, the treatment of her pro se status and her lack of personal notice of court filings, the lack of response to her ex parte communication, the failure to report alleged attorney misconduct, and the entry of certain court orders. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

The Appellant brought suit against his psychiatrist and the psychiatrist’s clinic, but the trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants. After appellate briefing and oral argument but prior to the filing of the opinion of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court, the psychiatrist died. The Appellant became aware of the death after the Tennessee Supreme Court denied his application for permission to appeal. He, subsequently, filed numerous motions for relief in the trial court. The trial court denied relief under Rule 60 and denied the other motions. We affirm.

This appeal arises from a general claim of negligence stemming from a dog bite. The plaintiffs adopted a dog from an animal shelter owned and operated by the defendant, a governmental entity. The dog bit one of the plaintiffs shortly after adoption. The plaintiffs sued, claiming that the shelter had a duty to warn them of the dog’s dangerous propensities but failed to do so. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court determined that the evidence did not create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the foreseeability of the incident, and therefore, the plaintiffs could not establish the defendant owed them a duty to warn. Accordingly, the trial court granted the motion for summary judgment. The plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

The trial court entered a parenting plan setting parenting time and child support between Mother and Father. Mother appealed. Mother raises a due process challenge to the trial extending into the late evening of the last day. She also challenges the trial court’s analysis of the best interest factors, its allocation of parenting time, its designation of Father as the primary residential parent, its awarding to Father sole decision-making authority, and its denial of Mother’s motion to alter or amend. Father seeks attorney’s fees on appeal. We affirm the trial court’s ruling and award attorney’s fees.

Defendant, Elliot Arnaz Price, was indicted by the Knox County Grand Jury for one count of burglary. After trial, a petit jury convicted Defendant as charged. The trial court classified Defendant as a career offender and sentenced him to an effective sentence of twelve years’ incarceration. On appeal, Defendant argues (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for burglary; (2) the trial court committed reversible error in violation of Tennessee Rules of Evidence 608 and 609 by admitting evidence of Defendant’s prior charge for burglary and of Defendant’s conduct underlying the burglary charge; (3) the trial court committed reversible error by classifying him as a career offender; (4) the trial court committed plain error in violation of Defendant’s confrontation rights by admitting the arresting officer’s affidavit from a prior theft case; and (5) the trial court committed plain error by improperly instructing the jury that the “without the consent of the property owner” element of burglary applied to Defendant’s “actions” rather than Defendant’s “entry” onto the victim’s property.2 After review, we conclude there are instances of error made by the trial court, but determine such errors were harmless and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Shay Tyler Little, appeals his Montgomery County Circuit Court conviction of aggravated burglary, for which he received a suspended sentence of six years’ supervised probation. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Discerning no error, we affirm.

An employee suffered severe injuries while working for a subcontractor and sought workers’ compensation benefits from the logistics company that had retained the subcontractor. In response, the logistics company filed a declaratory judgment action asserting that it was exempt from liability as a “common carrier. ” The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the logistics company, concluding that the company’s federal operating authority established its common carrier status as a matter of law. The injured employee appeals, arguing that a genuine dispute of material fact exists regarding the logistics company’s status because it exclusively served a single customer rather than the general public. We reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for further proceedings.

The Tennessee Department of Revenue will host a free webinar on Tennessee tax issues for auctioneers on May 26 at 9 a.m. CDT. During the session, department staff will discuss state tax issues for auctioneers, including information about the state’s sales tax, business tax and licensing, and access to the TNTAP system. The May webinar is part of a free series the department offers to the public. Register for the webinar on the department's website.

Tony Carruthers' execution was halted at the last minute after the contracted doctor failed to establish a viable IV line for the lethal injection. Unable to find a suitable vein, the doctor attempted to place a central line as required by protocol, but was not qualified to do so — and the attempt failed. An emergency filing was made to the Tennessee Supreme Court, after which Gov. Bill Lee issued a one-year reprieve. According to the Nashville Banner, Carruthers' ACLU attorney called it a "botched execution," saying her client had been "tortured" during the failed attempts to find a vein. Read more in a press release from the Middle Tennessee Federal Public Defender's Office about the failed execution. In a press release issued on Tuesday, the defender's office stated that the Tennessee Department of Corrections (TDOC) was refusing to confirm that they would not use expired lethal injection drugs to execute Carruthers. Tennessee’s 2025 Lethal Injection Protocol does not expressly forbid the state from using expired drugs in an execution. Rather, it imposes a system of regular and pre-execution inventories and requires appropriate disposal only if expired drugs are revealed during one such inventory. The Banner and The Associated Press report on the developments.