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 lawyer was suspended and put on probation after failing to file a personal injury case. The statute of limitations ran out due to his forgetting the deadline. The Tennessee lawyer failed to add a calendar reminder to track the statute of limitations deadline. Causes of Missed Deadlines.
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. The statute criminalizes performances on public land or in a location in which the performance “could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.”
19, 2022), plaintiff county filed this legal malpractice suit against defendant attorney who had represented the county in an underlying action filed by a former county employee. The dispositive issue on appeal was whether the trial court correctly granted the motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. In Coffee County v.
In September, owners and managers of residential property challenged the moratorium in the Western District of Tennessee on grounds that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and the district court struck down the order. Congress extended the moratorium to January 31, 2021, and the CDC further extended it to March 31.
When a litigant has filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA), that motion should be analyzed under the provisions of the TPPA rather than under the traditional Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12 analysis. In Reiss v. Rock Creek Construction, Inc. , quoting Tenn. Code Ann. §
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. 55-8-136, which is a Class C misdemeanor, the statute of limitations for plaintiff’s action was extended to two years pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § Code Ann. §
Where plaintiff had filed complaints with the Board of Professional Responsibility (BPR) complaining of the same allegations that allegedly supported her legal malpractice claim, and those BPR complaints were filed more than one year before the legal malpractice suit was filed, summary judgment based on the statute of limitations was affirmed.
Where plaintiff filed a legal malpractice action in federal court within the one-year statute of limitations, but then waited more than one year after dismissal of that federal case to file this claim for legal malpractice, dismissal based on the statute of limitations was affirmed. In Tolson v. Herbison , No.
The Tennessee Supreme Court reviews very few cases in a given year. There are other types of cases that the Court is required to hear.) Given the case selection criteria in discretionary review matters and the types of appeal-as-of-right cases, each opinion is highly likely to materially impact Tennessee law. Code Ann. §
A man was shot Thursday in Espanola, New Mexico during a protest over the reinstallation of a statute of the conquistador Juan de Onate , who massacred and enslaved the Acoma Indigenous people in 1599. The removal of controversial statues across the US has been challenged legally with mixed results in Texas , Tennessee and Louisiana.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked a new Tennessee law limiting drag shows on constitutional grounds. Federal district judge Thomas Parker granted an injunction on the ground that the Tennessee law is vague and overly broad. However, many of these events are held off school grounds and with the support of their parents.
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). Because the TPPA is a relatively new statute, it has not been interpreted in many opinions.
Proof related to potential damages alone are insufficient to sustain a legal malpractice claim in Tennessee. April 10, 2024) (memorandum opinion), plaintiff filed a legal malpractice claim against defendant attorney. Vaughan , No. E2023-00930-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Defendant moved for summary judgment. Continue reading
Further, where the other defendant was added as a party after the statute of limitations had run, summary judgment for that defendant was also affirmed. Under the agreement, “OVI retained ultimate legal responsibility, authority, and responsibility over the rendition of all residential treatment services at the facility.”. In Waller v.
Borden argued that the enhancement did not apply because one of the three prior offenses that the government relied on was a conviction under Tennessee law for reckless aggravated assault. That crime, as its name suggests, can result from reckless conduct – a less culpable legal standard than purposefully or knowingly causing injury.
Reid had her “execute legal documents while under the influence of medication and falsely led [plaintiff] to believe that she could change her mind,” and that CRMC was vicariously liable for Ms. Plaintiff appealed the dismissal to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s permission to appeal.
Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, asserting that plaintiff failed to file her complaint within the three-year statute of repose. Defendant filed a new motion to dismiss, asserting that plaintiffs’ various informed consent claims were barred by either the statute of repose or the statute of limitations. Rule 56.04
During the divorce proceedings, defendant allegedly asked plaintiff to sign a written agreement to continue the lease, which plaintiff refused to sign because it was “onerous, high risk, and legally ineffective.” Note: Chapter 22 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law has been updated to include this decision.
The Court noted that “the legal questions involved in the absolute litigation privilege are particularly well-suited for disposition on a motion to dismiss so long as the requirements of the rule are met.” Note: Chapter 28, Section 11 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law has been updated to include this decision.
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. Based on this legal standard, the Court of Appeals agreed that plaintiff did not comply with the HCLA pre-suit notice requirements here. internal citations omitted).
legal system. The Legal Services Corporation estimates that 92% of the civil legal problems of the roughly 50 million low-income Americans receive no or insufficient legal help. For many with legal problems, simply knowing the law and their rights is the first step toward achieving a resolution.
Where defendant driver stated that the accident that injured plaintiff passenger was due to her swerving to avoid a wild animal that unexpectedly entered the roadway, and plaintiff “presented no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant,” summary judgment for defendant was affirmed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals. In Owings v.
Where a plaintiff originally named the wrong defendant in a car accident case and did not file an amended complaint naming the correct defendant until after the one-year statute of limitations had run, dismissal was affirmed. The purpose of Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 15.03 In Black v. W2020-00228-COA-R3-CV (Tenn.
Defendant raised several issues on appeal, the first being his assertion that “the evidence [was] not legally sufficient to support a finding that [plaintiff] acted with ‘due diligence’ and, therefore, her claim for intentional misrepresentation and fraud ‘should have failed.’” internal citation omitted).
Defendant filed a motion to dismiss on two grounds, the statute of limitations and “failure to plead facts to state a claim as required by Tenn. was “an independent basis for dismissal,” and because plaintiff only addressed the statute of limitations argument in her appellate brief, she “waived her right to appeal” this ruling.
Tennessee Justice Programs has released it Fall 2020 on-demand video seminar CLE programs. Former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Penny White, former Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Joe Riley, and I started Justice Programs almost 20 years ago. United States Supreme Court Review (Part 2) & Civil and Criminal Procedure. (1
The arbitration was eventually settled for $7 million, and plaintiff incurred $900,000 in legal fees. Based on the circumstances of this case and the application of the relevant statute, however, the Court of Appeals disagreed. The Court noted that Tenn. Code Ann. §
Defendants filed a petition to dismiss the complaint under the Tennessee Public Participation Act (“TPPA”). 20-17-106, a provision of the TPPA which “allows a party to immediately appeal a court’s order dismissing or refusing to dismiss a legal action pursuant to a petition filed under the TPPA.” Continue reading
PI Tennessee, LLC , No. A duty of care is “the legal obligation owed by defendant to plaintiff to conform to a reasonable person standard of care for the protection against unreasonable risks of harm.” Note: Chapter 29, Section 2 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law has been updated to include this decision.
Tennessee Justice Programs has released it Fall 2020 on-demand video seminar CLE programs. Former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Penny White, former Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Joe Riley, and I started Justice Programs almost 20 years ago. United States Supreme Court Review (Part 2) & Civil and Criminal Procedure. (1
Dyer County Tennessee , No. The Court looked at several cases examining this exception and noted that “[c]ases applying the Public Duty Doctrine make clear that whether a special duty arose under Tennessee law does not simply turn on whether the defendant might have reason to know that someone was in danger under the circumstances.”
Further, the trial court found that plaintiff had satisfied the elements of fraudulent concealment such that the three-year statute of limitations was tolled and the case was not time-barred. The Court next analyzed defendant’s claim that the conversion case was barred by the statute of limitations. In Pomeroy v. McGinnis , No.
Every state has enacted its own controlled substances statutes and regulations, many of which mirror the federal CSA and DEA regulations. Other states variously control marijuana as a schedule III (Minnesota), schedule VI (Arkansas, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Tennessee), schedule VIA (Alaska), or schedule Z (Maine).
To Judge Kethledge, that understanding of section 403 incorrectly applies “technical legal effect to a figure of speech” calling for ordinary meaning. Judge Griffin further noted that every other circuit that has considered the meaning of “a sentence” in the statute has come out differently than Jackson and Carpenter.
Under the FCC’s proposals that are designed to clear up which entity is responsible for legal and regulatory compliance, such multicast streams will be part of the originating station’s license, not that of the “host” station. See the Federal Register notice, here , and read the comments submitted to the docket, here.
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Friday blocked a Tennessee law that outlawed abortions based on certain reasons, such as a prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome or the race or gender of the fetus. The court also blocked the state’s six-week abortion ban. It is, in fact, just the opposite.
Where a patient left the hospital with known pressure ulcers and no wound treatment plan, the statute of limitations for his HCLA (health care liability act, formerly known as medical malpractice) claim related to those skin wounds began to run on the day he was discharged from the hospital. In Jackson v. This ruling was affirmed on appeal.
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.”. The TPPA is Tennessee’s anti-SLAPP statute, which stands for “strategic lawsuits against public participation.” In Laferney v.
Where plaintiff knew her husband was killed in a car accident with a firefighter but did not know all the details regarding how the accident occurred, the one-year statute of limitations began to run on the day of the crash and her GTLA suit that was filed more than one year after the accident was untimely. In Durham v.
Where plaintiff submitted no expert proof to support his legal malpractice claim, summary judgment for defendant was affirmed. Plaintiff thereafter filed this pro se legal malpractice claim against defendant. In the instant case, defendant moved for summary judgment on the legal malpractice claim, which the trial court granted.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals has ruled plaintiffs can pursue claims based on recklessness and gross negligence under the GTLA. Pursuant to the language of the statute, the trial court had held that plaintiffs’ claims could not proceed because they were based on allegations of reckless conduct. In Lawson v. Hawkins County, TN , No.
Where a Tennessee HCLA plaintiff sent a HIPAA authorization that failed to allow the defendants to obtain records from each other, the trial court’s finding that plaintiff did not comply with the statutory requirements and that the suit was thus time-barred was affirmed. Klemis , No. W2019-02115-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. internal citation omitted).
Plaintiff also testified that he printed the power of attorney form online, and that anytime he presented the document, he stated that he was not sure of its legality. During oral arguments, plaintiff also suggested that Owens was inapplicable because the statute cited therein, Tenn. Code Ann. § Code Ann. § Code Ann. § Code Ann. §
On appeal, plaintiffs attempted to rely on Tennessee’s Post-Mortem Examination Act to support their argument that the distribution of the autopsy photos was not protected speech under the U.S. and Tennessee Constitutions. Without more, this activity cannot be deemed ‘outrageous’ in the legal sense. This is new law in Tennessee.
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