This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
A Tennessee state courtruled that a Republican-drawn map for the state’s Senate seats violated the Tennessee Constitution. The Tennessee Constitution states that “a county having more than one senatorial district, the district shall be numbered consecutively.”
Managing an increasing volume of cases and court deadlines– sometimes in multiple jurisdictions – is one of the biggest time management challenges for law firms. . A Tennessee lawyer was suspended and put on probation after failing to file a personal injury case. The Solution: Integrated CourtRules.
Judge Thomas Parker, a judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Friday ruled that Tennessee’s Adult Entertainment Act (AEA) is unconstitutional. In his opinion, Parker ruled that the AEA violates First Amendment rights. Parker previously enjoined the AEA in April.
One of the three violent felonies the government alleged as a predicate to the ACCA charge was for reckless aggravated assault under Tennesseelaw. He wrote instead that the phrase is “a centuries-old term of art in the criminal law that distinguishes offenses against the person from offenses against property.”
In the annals of environmental law, no creature is more famous than the Snail Darter, the endangered species that showdown completion of the Tellico Dam in the 1970s. The controversy began in 1967 when the Tennessee Valley Authority started constructing a dam on the Little Tennessee River, roughly 20 miles outside Knoxville.
A Tennessee appeals court has unanimously ruled Tim Gilbert, a Black man convicted of aggravated assault and other charges by an all-white jury should get a new trial, saying that prosecutors failed to rebut a claim made by defense lawyers that the room where the jury deliberated was prejudicial to the man, reports the New York Times.
The trial court applied the statutory non-economic damages cap to reduce the award to $1,529,777, which the Court of Appeals affirmed in a lengthy opinion. The sole issue on appeal was “whether the jury’s verdict [was] contrary to the law or evidence.” Click on the link to see the book’s Table of Contents.
The Tennessee Supreme Court reviews very few cases in a given year. In the year ending June 30, 2020 (the last period for which information is publicly available) the High Court was asked to accept review in 569 cases. My new company and website, BirdDog Law , changes that. ” Bookmark BirdDog !
Where plaintiff real estate professional brought an action for defamation and false light based on an online review written by defendant, defendant moved to dismiss the action pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA). In Charles v. McQueen , No. M2021-00878-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 4490980 (Tenn. 20-17-101 et seq., quoting Tenn.
The Supreme Courtruled Thursday that prior convictions for crimes of reckless violence aren’t sufficient to trigger additional years of imprisonment for felons convicted of gun possession, reports the Wall Street Journal. Lower courts rejected his argument, and he was sentenced under the career-criminal law.
According to the author of Proposal 2, Vermont constitutional law professor Peter Teachout, the amendment makes no change to substantive rights. Additionally, the Vermont Supreme Courtruled in 1802 that once crossed over into Vermont, a slave contract from another state was unenforceable. Vermont has always prohibited slavery.
Poe is the case that challenged the law enacted in Idaho last year, which prohibits treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors. Under the new law, physicians who provide gender-affirming care to transgender children could face up to 10 years in prison and up to $5,000 in fines.
The use of fines and fees to generate revenue for local justice systems constitutes a “predatory” relationship between law enforcement and citizens that violates the due process protections of the Constitution, according to a TennesseeLaw Review paper. Supreme CourtRulings.
Where defendant physician was employed by a state university and received no personal gain from the clinical services she rendered at a hospital, and plaintiff had brought an HCLA action based on these hospital clinical services, summary judgment pursuant to defendant’s absolute immunity under the Tennessee Claims Commission Act was affirmed.
Borden argued that the enhancement did not apply because one of the three prior offenses that the government relied on was a conviction under Tennesseelaw for reckless aggravated assault. United States , the Supreme Courtruled that the residual clause is so vague that it is unconstitutional and therefore cannot be enforced.
April 14, 2022), plaintiff filed an HCLA claim against several defendants, including the State of Tennessee as the employer of Dr. Landry, who was allegedly negligent. 3, 2019), the Courtruled that “language in a complaint cannot substitute for a proper certificate of good faith.” In Gilbert v. State , No. In Dotson v.
The Court noted that plaintiff’s only evidence that the cap was dangerous was the evidence of her own fall and the fall of the alleged other unnamed homeowner, and that “[n]egligence cannot be presumed by the mere happening of an injury or accident.” internal citation omitted). Click on the link to see the book’s Table of Contents.
Where plaintiff’s personal injury claim was based on a Tennessee car accident for which defendant was given a traffic citation for failure to exercise due care under Tenn. A state trooper issued defendant a traffic citation listing three violations, including “failure to exercise due care, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 55-8-136.”
While defendant urged the Court to “follow the modern trend taken in federal courts, which no longer requires renewal of a motion for directed verdict at the close of all the proof,” the Court declined to change long-standing Tennesseelaw. Accordingly, the Courtruled that, pursuant to Tenn.
Defendant Wolf Tree (Wolf) filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that it owed no duty to plaintiffs because “its contract with SCES explicitly stated that it was not to prune service drops,” because “it had no statutory or common law duty,” and because “Plaintiffs could show no evidence of a negligent or intentional trespass or nuisance.”
A finding of trespass requires a court to award nominal damages under Tennesseelaw. 12, 2024) (memorandum opinion), the Court of Appeals overturned a trial court’s refusal to award damages after a trespass finding. In Dorer v. Hennessee , No. M2023-00729-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. internal citation omitted).
Taking the allegations in the complaint as true, the Court found that “a trier of fact could determine that Plaintiffs, in the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, could not have discovered this potential cause of their injury until January 2018 due to Defendants’ attempts to conceal this cause.”
The trial court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that “Plaintiffs’ claims for medical battery and intentional misrepresentation were based on false statements the Defendants made to [plaintiff] before they established a doctor-patient relationship,” and the Court of Appeals affirmed this “temporal analysis” on interlocutory appeal.
When that friend could not find a Tennessee lawyer to take her case before the statute of limitations ran out, he sent her a sample pre-suit notice form. This case reaffirmed what seems to be settled law in HCLA cases—that pre-suit notice sent to the wrong defendant will not satisfy the requirements of the HCLA.
After discovery, DSS filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The trial courtruled that plaintiff had asserted a premises liability claim, and that “DSS did not owe Plaintiff a duty of care under premises liability.” Plaintiff then amended his complaint to assert claims against DSS as well.
City of Algood, Tennessee , No. At the close of plaintiff’s proof, defendant moved for involuntary dismissal of plaintiff’s claims pursuant to TennesseeRule of Civil Procedure 41.02(2), 2), which the trial court granted. 2), the trial court did not err in considering the testimony of [plaintiff’s wife].”.
More than two weeks after the order of dismissal was entered, defendants filed a “combined motion to alter or amend and petition to dismiss with prejudice pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act” (TPPA). voluntary dismissals in Tennessee. internal citation omitted). internal citation omitted).
The trial court agreed that the case fell within the HCLA and dismissed the suit without prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to provide pre-suit notice. In Mears v. Nashville Center for Rehabilitation and Healing, LLC , No. M2022-00490-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. 29, 2023), plaintiff was a resident at defendant skilled nursing facility.
The Courtruled that this response was insufficient and that the statement was thus admitted, explaining: Rule 56.03 Accordingly, the Courtruled that the fact was admitted and defendant could not “be charged with actual notice.”. internal citations and quotations omitted). internal citation omitted).
In an opinion released on the 2021 deadline for Americans to file their federal income taxes, the courtruled 9-0 that the AIA does not bar CIC’s pre-enforcement lawsuit challenging the IRS notice. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion for the court. The case involves reporting requirements.
There is an interesting and difficult free speech controversy brewing at Tennessee Tech University. The board rejected the proposal and Donadio, an assistant professor of nursing at Tennessee Tech as well as a local county commissioner , applauded loudly. Your hate & hypocrisy are not welcome at Tennessee Tech. seven times.
This appeal followed, and the Court of Appeals vacated the judgment for defendant. Defendant’s arguments regarding duty were “similarly deficient,” as it “support[ed] its duty argument largely based on case law that was resolved not on the element of duty, but on the question of comparative fault.” internal citation omitted).
The Tennessee Supreme Court has interpreted this requirement to mean that a plaintiff must “provide pre-suit notice to prospective health care defendants each time a complaint is filed.” This conclusion is most aligned with Tennesseelaw and public policy. Here, [defendants] received the Notice on April 25, 2019.
Dyer County Tennessee , No. Making all reasonable inferences in plaintiff’s favor here, the Court of Appeals found that the deputy’s actions could be considered operational and that immunity was thus removed under the GTLA, unless a defense applied. In Kimble v. W2019-02042-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. internal citation omitted).
The Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA) governs suits against governmental entities in Tennessee, removing immunity for governmental entities only in certain situations. Based on the same evidence cited above, the Court found that Mr. Mosby did not “act with a callous indifference to potentially harming a student.” Code Ann. §
1] He is also an adjunct professor at American University Washington College of Law. ten years ago—at least in part due to longstanding common lawrules on champerty, maintenance, [3] and patent law’s relative high risk—today third-party litigation funding (TPLF) [4] undergirds about 30% of all patent litigation, by conservative estimates. [5]
The Court of Appeals first considered plaintiff’s claim that defendant created a “temporary nuisance by diverting water onto his property.” This opinion contains a good review of the law of both types of claim as they relate to water flow issues. internal citation and quotation omitted). NOTE: This opinion was released 2.5
Plaintiff argued that the “trial court erred in failing to quash, suppress, or strike Nurse Mercer’s errata sheet testimony,” but the Court of Appeals disagreed. TennesseeRule of Civil Procedure 30.05 internal citations omitted).
While plaintiff had attached “unrelated examples of medical releases and discovery requests from other cases” to her response to the motion to dismiss, there was “nothing in the record to suggest that the Trial Court considered these…in making its decision.” internal citation omitted).
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled on Saturday in favor of Tennessee, removing a temporary injunction placed on a Tennesseelaw banning gender-affirming healthcare for minors, including hormones and puberty blockers. Skrmetti’s office appealed the district courtruling at the end of June.
The Tennessee Senate passed a bill Thursday that would require public schools to show a fetal development video comparable to one produced by an anti-abortion group to its students. The bill has received strong criticism from Tennessee Democrats and medical organizations.
In a 2-1 decision on Friday, the US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request to revive a Tennesseelaw requiring a 48-hour waiting period before abortions while the court hears an appeal of the district court’s decision that ruled the law unconstitutional.
When appealing a trial court’s order dismissing or refusing to dismiss a case under the Tennessee Public Protection Act (TPPA), the appeal “must be filed within thirty days of the entry of that order.”. This is an important case, as it provides further interpretation of the TPPA, a relatively new statute in Tennessee.
published in the Brooklyn Law Review. Examine the courtrulings and courtroom practices around VIS, and several practical questions arise, argues Bandes. The 1991 Supreme Courtruling in Payne v. Subsequent court decisions have muddied the legal waters on VIS. In Booth v.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content