DON’T MISS THESE KBA CLE PROGRAMS & EVENTS IN AUGUST!
Modernization of Tennessee’s Foreclosure Law
Tuesday, August 12, 12-1 p.m. | Zoom Webinar
David Anthony, Exo Legal PLLC and Amy Heaslet,Tennessee Bankers Association
1 hour of General CLE
Conservatorship Refresh with Clerk & Master
Tuesday, August 26, 12-1 p.m. | City County Building, Small Assembly Room
Scott Griswold, Clerk & Master of Knox County Chancery Court
Presented by the KBA Trusts & Estates Section and Sponsored by TCV Trust & Wealth Management
1 hour of General CLE
Residential Landlord-Tenant Update in a Post-COVID World
Thursday, August 28, 12-1 p.m. | Zoom Webinar
Michael J. King, Paine, Bickers, Elder, King & Williams, LLP
1 hour of General CLE
Officers of the Knoxville Bar Association
KBA Board of Governors
Courteney M. Barnes-Anderson
R. Kim Burnette
Melissa B. Carrasco
Meagan Collver
Samuel K. Lee
T. Mitchell Panter
M. Samantha Parris
Courtney Epps Read
Charles S.J. Sharrett
The Knoxville Bar Association Staff
James T. Snodgrass
James R. Stovall
C. Scott Taylor
Alicia J. Teubert
5 President’s Message
How the KBA Promotes Respect for the Legal System
7 Appealing
Let it Be, and Shake it Off 8 Legal Update
US Supreme Court Upholds
Tennessee’s Ban on GenderAffirming Medical Care for Minors
19 Schooled in Ethics
Honesty is the Best Policy
21 Management Counsel
Shift in Oversight for Complaints of
Knoxville, TN 37902
865-522-6522
Fax: 865-523-5662 www.knoxbar.org
Dicta
DICTA is published monthly (except July) by the Knoxville Bar Association. It is designed to offer information of value to members of the local bar association. The news and features should illustrate the issues affecting the bar and its members. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of the Knoxville Bar Association.
All articles submitted for publication in DICTA must be submitted in writing and in electronic format (via e-mail attachment). Exceptions to this policy must be cleared by KBA Executive Director Tasha Blakney (522-6522).
Publications Committee
Executive Editor Sarah Booher
Executive Editor Wade H. Boswell, II
Executive Editor Melissa B. Carrasco
Executive Editor Summer McMillan
Sherri Alley
Parker Bohne
Elizabeth B. Ford
Joseph G. Jarret
F. Regina Koho
Matthew R. Lyon
Robin McMillan
Angelia Morie Nystrom
Katheryn Murray Ogle
Bridget Pyman
Cathy Shuck
Jimmy Snodgrass
Eddy Smith
Grant Williamson Volume 53, Issue 7 Dicta is the official publication of the Knoxville Bar Association
Managing Editor Tasha C. Blakney
KBA Executive Director
Tasha C. Blakney Executive Director
Tracy Chain LRIS Administrator
Tammy Sharpe Director of CLE & Section Programming
Bridgette Fly Membership Coordinator
Jason Galvas Programs & Communications Coordinator
By: Jonathan D. Cooper Knox Defense
HOW THE KBA PROMOTES RESPECT FOR THE LEGAL SYSTEM
As a profession, attorneys have never enjoyed the best reputation, and the countless jokes demonstrate this. “What do you call 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?” Beyond the punch lines, however, and as I noted in my January column, recent data indicates that the public’s confidence in our legal system is in decline. Americans’ confidence in our judicial system dropped to a record-low 35% in 2024.1
For this reason, I believe it is important to reflect on the ways the Knoxville Bar Association increases our community’s respect for the judicial system through community outreach and service. We do a lot of this, and these events and services promote lawyers and the legal system more persuasively and more broadly than a well-tried lawsuit. So, here are just a few ways the KBA promotes respect for our legal system.
Access to Justice Committee. The KBA Access to Justice Committee is deeply involved in community outreach and service. This committee, by and through its members and KBA staff, works with community partners to serve the underserved in Knoxville. Here are some of the programs to which these attorneys volunteer their time:
• Debt Relief Clinic (with Judge Suzanne Bauknight and the KBA Bankruptcy Committee)
• Small Business Clinic
• Family Power of Attorney Clinic
• Knoxville Legal Ministry
• Homeless Court
• Expungement Clinic
Additionally, the committee partners with the KBA Barristers and Legal Aid of East Tennessee to serve in the Access to Justice Veteran’s Legal Clinic, which provides pro bono legal advice to our local veterans. These are not annual events. They occur either every month or every other month! This represents hundreds of hours of pro bono work offered to our community, and those served surely leave with gratitude for the attorneys who have served them.
Barristers. The Barristers is the young lawyers’ division of the KBA, and these attorneys supply enthusiasm, altruism, and boundless energy for many programs that serve those in need, educate the public, and promote the values of our democratic legal system. For the last 25 years, the Barristers have volunteered weekly with the Knoxville-Knox County CAC Office on Aging, delivering thousands of meals over the years to homebound elderly members of our community. The Barristers serve breakfast once a month at 6:15 a.m. at the Volunteer Ministry Center. They serve at the Veteran’s Legal Clinic. Working with Child Help, they collect school supplies to go to families who host foster children.
In addition to community service, the Barristers are also responsible for two significant annual programs aimed at educating the public and promoting the value of our legal system. First, every year, members of
the Barristers go to elementary schools on Constitution Day to share important concepts about the principles of our democracy. Second, the Barristers are responsible for organizing our local Mock Trial competition, which provides excellent exposure to our court system for area high school students. This is especially valuable in my mind because participating in the Mock Trial competition as a high school student is what convinced me to become a lawyer. This annual production introduces students to key principles of rules, legal standards, impartiality, due process, and advocacy. What better civics lesson could our high school students receive?
Law Day Celebration. The KBA has presented the Law Day Celebration luncheon for decades, featuring awards to individuals for outstanding service to the community and a prominent speaker on important legal values. It is the single largest gathering of the Knoxville Bar. This year, Lamar Alexander spoke about “e pluribus unum” – out of many, one – cautioning that our society is placing too much value on “pluribus,” or division, and not enough value on “unum,” or unity. While this event does not offer direct public service or education, the publicity it generates certainly fosters respect for our legal system and democratic principles.
Legislative Breakfast. For the last couple of years, we have invited local state representatives and senators to a breakfast so that they can address issues of interest with the KBA. Because so few of these legislators are attorneys, this event serves to remind them of the connection between public interest, legal principles, and the court system. Memorial Service. Finally, you may not have ever thought of how our annual (and recently semi-annual) memorial services build respect for the law, but they do. If you have attended one of these, you understand the power of remembering the lives and accomplishments of KBA members who have recently passed. It is uplifting like no other event we sponsor. When family and other members of the public hear these accolades and hear the commitment of these attorneys to the legal profession, sometimes spanning many decades, they are reminded of the value of our legal system and the integrity of the men and women who make this their profession. No one would ever make these lawyers the punch line of a joke.
Be sure to read Mariel Bough’s article on page 29, “Volunteering: A Cornerstone of the KBA’s Lasting Community Impact,” for more details about service the KBA and its members provide to our community. I am so proud of our organization and its staff who give so selflessly of their time with no thought of recognition or recompense. While this work is performed outside of a courtroom, it has no less effect on demonstrating the value and fairness of our justice system. So, if you are involved with public outreach and service, thank you. And, if you are not, please consider ways you can contribute. After all, would you prefer to just be “A good start?”
1 Benedict Vigers & Lydia Saad, Americans Pass Judgment on Their Courts, Gallup, https://news.gallup.com/poll/ 653897/americans-pass-judgment-courts.aspx, December 17, 2024.
JUDICIAL PROFILE
By: Jacob King
University of Tennessee Winston College of Law
JD Candidate 2026
OPPORTUNITY, HARD WORK, AND VERSATILITY: HON. DEBORAH STEVENS’S KEYS TO SUCCESS IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION
Since graduating from law school in 1980, Judge Deborah Stevens of the Knox County Circuit Court has no shortage of key insights and advice for law students and attorneys, both young and old. However, Judge Stevens’s journey was not always clear. She grew up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as the oldest of five children. Her father was an electrical engineer who worked on railroad signal devices, and there were no attorneys in her family. During high school, while listening to a Pittsburgh Pirates baseball game on the radio, her father broached the subject of what she wanted to do after graduating. After discussing several potential careers with her father, Judge Stevens ultimately settled on a career in law, and she never looked back.
Judge Stevens married her husband while attending Virginia Tech and followed him to Knoxville, where he began his career as a civil engineer at the Tennessee Valley Authority. At the same time, Judge Stevens enrolled at the University of Tennessee College of Law. When she started in 1977, the class of 1980 had the largest number of female students of any other class at the time. Twenty percent of her class consisted of women, and coincidentally, about eighty percent of those women, including Judge Stevens, were grouped alphabetically into section three.
Unfortunately, the law school did not offer much in the way of career services at that time. The school did not host on-campus interviews, nor did it have a career center to guide its students toward jobs post-graduation. Judge Stevens remarked how difficult it was getting a job as a woman and vividly remembered firms saying things like, “Gee, we’d love to hire you, but you could get pregnant.”
Nevertheless, at the end of her 3L year, her property professor informed her class of a job at a small firm in Knoxville. Judge Stevens was the only student who approached her professor about the opportunity, and she was hired sight unseen for her first legal job as a clerk. She worked there after law school, but she applied at other places along the way. Eventually, she began working in Morgan County, where she encountered several mentor figures and tried a wide variety of cases, including divorce and banking work.
After working in Morgan County for three years, Judge Stevens received a call from Morton, Lewis, King & Krieg (now known as Lewis Thomason) to help with FDIC litigation involving the Butcher banks. This litigation involved the then-local banking mogul and ex-Democratic nominee for Tennessee governor, Jake Butcher, who was found guilty of bank fraud. At that time, the firm consisted of only twelve lawyers.
She described it as a great place to work, and she felt that everyone was treated with the same level of respect, no matter their gender or seniority. For instance, Charles Lewis, one of the firm’s founding members, would introduce Judge Stevens as his “partner.” She valued the fact that at her firm, the quality of one’s work was more important than any title.
Her career also allowed her to work in many different practice areas. Judge Stevens’s work included serious product liability cases, most notably the Honda three-wheeler product liability litigation in the early 90s. During this time, she traveled all over the country litigating these cases and was at her happiest arguing in front of juries.
By 2013, after nearly 30 years at the firm—many of them as managing partner—Judge Stevens felt it was time to pass the torch. Then, when Judge Rosenbalm retired from the circuit bench, she saw a brandnew opportunity. Drawing on her deep relationships in the legal community, she successfully applied for the judgeship. She was appointed to the bench by Governor Bill Haslam in March 2013, and three days later, she found herself presiding over a medical malpractice jury trial.
In her early days as a judge, Judge Stevens faced several challenges, such as writing in a more neutral style and the lack of contact with other people and attorneys. Despite these challenges, Judge Stevens feels right at home on the bench. Now, she gets to apply her favorite subjects in law school, torts and evidence, on a daily basis. As a natural advocate, Judge Stevens loves the art of trial and strives to prioritize and emphasize the role of the juror in the civil justice system.
Nevertheless, the number of cases that go to trial has drastically fallen. As an unfortunate side effect, younger litigators have little trial experience. To gain experience, Judge Stevens encourages litigators with at least five years of experience to utilize trial programs offered by the ABA and the American Association for Justice (AAJ). Judge Stevens is also more than happy to act as a mentor by taking notes and providing feedback on your performance as long as you ask her to at the beginning of the trial. Reflecting on her time at Lewis Thomason, Judge Stevens advises young lawyers of the importance of mentors and who raises you
continued on page 15
APPEALING
By: Robin McMillan Attorney at Law
LET IT BE, AND SHAKE IT OFF1
1What is the purpose of a Tenn. R. App. P. 9 interlocutory appeal? If your answer is ‘to correct errors early,’ it is time to reconsider. Interlocutory appeals were not designed to correct errors early to make trying a case easier or cleaner.
The purpose of a Rule 9 interlocutory appeal is to prevent irrecoverable loss. The operative word here is ‘irrecoverable.’ If an error can be corrected after entry of final judgment, the loss is not irrecoverable, and the error is probably not appropriate for an interlocutory appeal. The vast majority of errors that might occur in a lawsuit fall within one of two categories: (1) errors that can be corrected after entry of final judgment, and (2) errors that are harmless. A Tenn. R. App. P. 3 appeal covers the first of these categories. The second need not be addressed at all because correcting a harmless error will not impact the ultimate outcome. Interlocutory appeals are designed to address a very small third category of errors, i.e., errors that if not immediately corrected will result in a loss, deemed not harmless, of something that can never be regained - a loss that cannot later be corrected.
Rule 9 interlocutory appeals are at the discretion of the appellate court.2 While not exhaustive, the rule provides three examples of the types of situations that the appellate courts may find appropriate for interlocutory appeal. These examples take into consideration whether appellate review after entry of final judgment would be fruitless.
The first Rule 9 example involves “the need to prevent irreparable injury.”3 The injury should be likely to occur, unlikely to constitute harmless error, and unlikely to be fixable after entry of final judgment. A situation that might be appropriate for interlocutory decision could arguably involve privileged information that the trial court has ordered disclosed. Once disclosed, privilege is lost. The cat will be out of the bag, and no attempt to put it back in will succeed. Thus, attempting to raise the issue in a Rule 3 appeal would be futile. Other types of situations that might fall within this category involve the potential for injury to persons or damage to property. For instance, if a divorcing parent is making credible threats to leave the country with a minor child or the trial court’s order allows for property to be destroyed, an interlocutory appeal might be warranted.
The second Rule 9 example involves “the need to prevent needless, expensive, and protracted litigation.”4 This is an often-misunderstood category. It was not meant to suggest that an interlocutory appeal is justified simply because requiring parties to continue to litigate an issue will cost more money. All litigation costs more the longer it progresses. This is basic billing-for-services math. If the case has not concluded, you will continue to provide legal services and bill your client for those services, and the cost of the litigation will increase.
Interlocutory appeals were not designed to allow parties to dispose of issues early simply to make further litigation easier or less expensive. To justify an interlocutory appeal, the availability of a Rule 3 appeal should be pointless for significant reasons beyond the mere fact that the client will continue to accrue costs if an interlocutory appeal is denied. A situation that might fall under this Rule 9 example category and warrant an interlocutory appeal could involve a jurisdictional issue about the sufficiency of pre-suit notice in a healthcare liability action. If the appellate court determined that presuit notice was inadequate, resulting in the lawsuit being untimely filed, then the case would be concluded immediately, preventing futile, “needless, expensive, and protracted litigation.”5
The third of the Rule 9 examples involves “the need to develop a uniform body of law” in light of “inconsistent orders of other courts.” 6 This is another often-misunderstood example largely because the final phrase is paramount and often overlooked. The final phrase provides that the issue “will not otherwise be reviewable upon entry of final judgment.” If the alleged error is one that can be corrected after entry of final judgment, the issue is not appropriate for interlocutory appeal. This is so regardless of whether there are inconsistent decisions of other courts or a need to develop a uniform body of law. Interlocutory appeals were not designed to circumvent Rule 3 appeals.
It is likely that the trial court will make a non-final decision with which your client is unhappy, but this does not necessarily mean that you should seek interlocutory review of that decision. If you are seeking an interlocutory appeal in a majority of cases, or on a routine basis, or you find yourself asking “how can I get my Rule 9 applications granted?,” it is time to rethink your strategy. Consider whether the alleged error involves irrecoverable loss. If the issue for which you would seek an interlocutory decision involves a privilege, an arguably strong jurisdictional question, potential injury to persons or damage to property, or some other potentially irrecoverable loss, then it might be worth your client’s money and time to seek an interlocutory appeal. If not, consider whether your client’s money and time would be better spent moving on to the next stage of the litigation and saving the issue for a Rule 3 appeal.
1 When one obtains an adverse non-final order from the trial court that will not cause irrecoverable loss, one ought to let it be and help the client to shake it off until entry of final judgment.
2 Tenn. R. App. P. 9(a).
3 Id.
4 Id.
5 Id.
6 Id.
By: Megan Bataille 3L, Lincoln Memorial University Duncan School of Law
US SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS TENNESSEE’S BAN ON GENDERAFFIRMING MEDICAL CARE FOR MINORS
Background
In a 6–3 decision released June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Skrmetti upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors, holding that the law survives rational-basis review under the Equal Protection Clause. The Tennessee legislature passed SB-1 in March 2023, which is known as the “Prohibition on Medical Procedures Performed on Minors Related to Sexual Identity.” SB-1 defines transgender individuals as “those whose gender identity is inconsistent with their sex at birth.” The bill was signed into law as Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 68-33-101 to 107 and took effect in July 2023.1
The statute contains a section dedicated to the legislature’s findings and justifications for specifically targeting “medical procedures that alter a minor’s hormonal balance, remove a minor’s sex organs, or otherwise change a minor’s physical appearance . . . when these medical procedures are performed for the purpose of enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex or treating purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s sex and asserted identity.” It further declares that the targeted interventions are “harmful to minors” and “not consistent with professional medical standards.”2
The prohibitive language of the statute reads in part, “A healthcare provider shall not knowingly perform or offer to perform on a minor, or administer or offer to administer to a minor, a medical procedure if the performance or administration of the procedure is for the purpose of: (A) Enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex; or (B) Treating purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s sex and asserted identity.” The text goes on to identify several exceptions on the prohibition of such treatments which include congenital defects, precocious puberty, and physical injury.3
The statute also creates a private right of action for minors or the parents of minors to pursue compensatory or punitive damages to recover for harm caused by a medical professional found to have provided the newly prohibited treatments.4
On May 16, 2023, the bill was challenged in United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Tennessee ACLU, Lambda Legal, and others on behalf of a 15-year-old transgender girl, her parents, two other anonymous plaintiff families, and Memphis physician Dr. Susan Lacy.5 The plaintiffs alleged the bill violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the 14th Amendment, contending that discrimination against transgender individuals is discrimination on the basis of sex and therefore subject to intermediate scrutiny. One week later, the United States filed a complaint in intervention under 42 U.S.C. § 2000h-2, likewise asserting an Equal Protection Claim.6
The litigation produced a partial preliminary injunction that permitted transgender minors already receiving care to continue treatment amid litigation of the law’s constitutionality, but it left the statute’s private right of action provision in place. Judge Eli Richardson remarked that “such a ban is likely unconstitutional,” pointing to several
substantively similar bans in other states that were faced with analogous constitutional challenges.7
On appeal, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to apply heightened scrutiny, reasoning that transgender status does not constitute a suspect or quasi-suspect class. Applying rational-basis review, the panel concluded that the statute violates neither the Due Process Clause nor the Equal Protection Clause because “legislators rationally could view the treatments as experimental and risky.” It therefore stayed the district court’s preliminary injunction while the litigation continued.8 The Supreme Court later granted certiorari, limited to the Equal Protection issue.
Decision
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court upholding the Tennessee statute. In the opinion, Chief Roberts identified two classifications created under the law: age and medical use, neither of which are suspect or quasi-suspect classifications that would be subject to a heightened standard of scrutiny. Justice Roberts reasoned that “SB-1 prohibits healthcare providers from administering puberty blockers and hormones to minors for certain medical uses, regardless of a minor’s sex,” and therefore the law is subject to rational basis scrutiny.9
Justice Thomas, concurring, rejected the application of Bostock10 to trigger intermediate scrutiny, warning that extending Bostock to Equal Protection would imperil numerous sex-specific medical laws and flood the courts with litigation.11
Justice Barrett, also concurring, stressed that the Court had not decided whether transgender people form a suspect class. Citing Carolene Products12, she noted that the Court has never created a new suspect class and argued transgender status lacks the distinguishing traits and history of discrimination to satisfy the high bar of the applicable test.13 Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Jackson and, in part, by Justice Kagan, dissented. She deemed SB-1 an express classification “on the basis of sex and transgender status” because it denies treatments to minors presenting as one sex that are available to those presenting as the other, mandating intermediate scrutiny. Failing to apply heightened scrutiny, she warned, threatens “irrevocable damage” to Equal Protection and “untold harm” to transgender youth.14
Justice Kagan dissented separately to emphasize that the Court should only rule on the applicable level of scrutiny and leave the issue of the statute’s constitutionality to be decided in the lower courts.15
In a press release from the State Attorney General’s Office, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti called the decision “a victory that transcends politics” and puts the health and safety of children at the forefront.16 Meanwhile, in an ACLU press release, Chase Strangio, Co-Director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project said that the ruling represents a “devastating loss” for transgender people and “everyone who cares about the Constitution.”17
1 Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 68-33-101 to 107.
2 Id. at § 101(b).
3 Id. at § 103(b).
4 Id. at §105(a)(1). continued on page 15
AROUND THE KBA
By: Grant Williamson
Bradley, Arrant, Boult, Cummings, LLP
Charity Glover
University of Tennessee College of Law, JD Candidate 2027
THE BARRISTERS: CELEBRATING AN AWARD-WINNING PROGRAM
The Knoxville Bar Association is beyond proud to announce that the Barristers’ Diversity Committee Scholarship Fund was the winner in the Diversity Initiative category for the 2025 Southeastern Legal Awards. The Scholarship Fund, which was created in 2022, has already provided scholarship funding to over twenty prospective law students of diverse and/or underrepresented backgrounds, including a group of students from Central State University (an HBCU in Ohio), in order to allow them to travel at no cost to visit the law schools at Lincoln Memorial University and the University of Tennessee.
The Barristers, through the Diversity Committee, determined that it was critical to their mission to get involved with diversity efforts at the law schools in Knoxville. After all, without a diverse group of law students in town, the KBA itself is less likely to have a diverse and inclusive membership. By creating a scholarship fund for students of underrepresented backgrounds who are interested in attending law school in Knoxville, the Barristers Diversity Committee hoped to remove a hindrance to its goal of creating a more diverse and inclusive bar by making it easier for future attorneys to experience Knoxville, its law schools, and its local bar association.
While the Knoxville Bar Association is proud of this recognition, our pride in the Scholarship Fund being a reason that Charity Glover chose to attend the University of Tennessee College of Law is immeasurably greater. With her permission, we’re sharing Charity’s personal experience with the fund and what it meant to her in her essay, which is printed below. As you read Charity’s reflection, we would be remiss not to take the opportunity to ask you to consider donating to the Scholarship Fund so that the Knoxville Bar Association can continue to take actionable steps to ensure that our local bar attracts more talented young attorneys of diverse, underrepresented backgrounds. You may support the program online at https://www.knoxbar. org/?pg=BarristersDiversityCommittee or by reaching out to Bridgette Fly at bfly@knoxbar.org. We appreciate your generosity and continued support of the Knoxville Bar Association!
The Journey to Rocky Top: How a Burden Became a Blessing, by Charity Glover
Selecting a law school is no easy task. For the fall 2024 cycle, I was accepted into eight institutions that promised me an exceptional legal education and a supportive legal community. While the pitch given by the institutions was great, I had to face the reality of my situation. How would I be able to afford to visit all of these places? How could I make a final decision without being able to at least see the place I would call home for the next three years and possibly after? As the deadline for seat deposits loomed, I was worried about how I could visit each campus. Then, unexpectedly, an email arrived from one of the admission officers at the University of Tennessee College of Law. I was informed that the Knoxville Bar Association (KBA) was offering a scholarship for outof-town students who were accepted so that they could come and visit. What initially seemed like a burden quickly became an opportunity. After being awarded the scholarship, I nervously made my way across the Alabama state line. While traveling, I thought to myself, Would I actually like Knoxville? Is the University of Tennessee College of Law really the right place for me? Those fears, however, soon went away.
The scholarship offered by the KBA not only enabled me to explore the charming city of Knoxville, but it also allowed me to experience firsthand the unwavering support of the legal community here. During my visit, I was able to meet Mariel Bough and Grant Williamson, two alumni from the University of Tennessee College of Law. They encouraged me to ask questions about the environment at the law school, provided me with advice about how to navigate my 1L year, and even shared their own personal stories. Thus, the scholarship did more than just cover travel expenses: it also proved the KBA’s commitment to fostering the next generation of legal professionals. This sense of community cemented my decision and reassured me that a bridge for long-term personal and professional growth existed not only in Knoxville but also at the College of Law.
Though I have faced challenges during my 1L year, my time at the University of Tennessee College of Law has still been nothing short of amazing. I have made friendships that will last for a lifetime, and I have found support in some of the most unexpected ways. As I continue to embark on my law school career, I will always be grateful for the KBA’s role in shaping a decision that will impact my life forever.
is pleased to announce new associate attorney
BETHANY L. COLLINS
Lincoln Memorial University, Duncan School of Law
1111 N. Northshore Drive, Suite N-290 Landmark Center North Tower Knoxville, Tennessee 37919
Tel: 865-588-1096
Fax: 865-588-1171
Email: bcollins@tcflattorneys.com
Tarpy, Cox, Fleishman & Leveille, PLLC
LEGALLY WEIRD
By: Lisa J. Hall, Esq. Hodges, Doughty & Carson, PLLC
STOP DRAGON MY ART AROUND
If you are brought up right in this business, at some point you are told that the way to distinguish yourself as a good lawyer is to do excellent work, with integrity, at a fair price, and the rest will take care of itself. To be fair, this strategy is all some lawyers need, but others find that they really need a gimmick to stand out and attract clients. Then you find out that lots of gimmicks have been used, and you are forced to be innovative with your gimmick creation.
In 2017, when the television show “Game of Thrones” was popular, Attorney Jacob Perrone first conceived the idea of a “dragon lawyer.” As he explained to Chad Sands, the editor of The Trial Lawyer’s Journal, “people liked dragons, and progressive representation was the thing that everybody was advertising, and everybody was trying to get the first page on Google.” Perrone’s law firm is called Dragon Lawyers PC. Earlier this year, Perrone launched his purple dragon brand symbol.1
Taking it about 25 steps further, Perrone decided to use the logo as a watermark, in color, on legal pleadings. As in, legal pleadings that are filed with the court, which will be seen by judges, opposing counsel, and, as it turns out here, a whole lot of people on the internet.
You may think that Perrone chose the color purple because he liked the color purple; however, he is actually color blind. “So when I put a watermark on a piece of paper, it didn’t have the same impact on me as it may someone else. So I can understand somebody seeing in full color, it might pop out a little more.”
Magistrate Judge Ray Kent2 was not impressed. He struck the Dragon Lawyer’s complaint as follows:
Each page of plaintiff’s complaint appears on an e-filing which is dominated by a large multi-colored cartoon dragon dressed in a suit, presumably because
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall not file any other documents with the cartoon dragon or other inappropriate content.
I may not have answers, but I do have some questions. They include, but are not limited to:
(1) The Dragon Lawyer spent the money to have a phone number that spells out (844) JAKELAW but could not somehow change it to “dragon” once he came up with this idea? (844) DRAGON1 or (844) DRGNLAW work better, in my opinion.
(2) The Dragon Lawyer went to the effort and took the risk of including a multi-colored dragon watermark on each page of his pleadings but still has the same yahoo email address one would assume he has had since he was a full-fledged adult. It is, frankly, disappointing that the creation of the Dragon Lawyer logo did not justify the creation of an appropriately named email address.
(3) Has the striking of the complaint resulted in more or less business for the Dragon Lawyer? Magistrate Ray Kent may not have been impressed, but I suspect that Google’s SEO ranking likely was, in which case, is it worth annoying one judge in order to substantially increase your client base and name recognition?3
I imagine that the takeaway for those reading this will be that every lawyer needs a gimmick, no matter what. If so, learn from the Dragon Lawyer’s mistakes and choose a different color for your own logo watermark on your pleadings. Purple has been taken.
1 I know you are viewing this in black and white, but you have to believe me – the actual logo is purple and red.
2 Yes, I too would like to see what Roy Kent would say about this Dragon Lawyer watermark concept, but the judge is Ray, not Roy. He is not here, but he is there. Upon information and belief, he is not every ____where.
3 This is obviously a rhetorical question. I would never risk (intentionally) annoying even one judge!
In the office, we frequently engage in what other colleagues have termed “dork fights.” Dork fights can break out at a moment’s notice, over just about anything. Often our dork fights are about different parts of our common hometown—Kingsport—but there is no limit to our topics of disagreement. Our best dork fights lead us back to our most common interest—the law. Most recently, however, the law led us to a dork fight about movies. More specifically, the Bearman Rule revealed divided loyalties about the Indiana Jones trilogy1
Brad, a purist, is firmly in the camp that Raiders of the Lost Ark is the superior installment of Indy’s adventures. He insists that it is the perfect mix of adventure, heart, and the iconic boulder chase. Of course, keeping the Ark out of the hands of the evil Nazis to save the world adds urgency to the plot.
Stefanie, on the other hand, finds Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade superior. The plot moves faster, it is funnier, and it features Sean Connery as Indy’s dad. There is a rich story, giving insight to Indy’s childhood and motivations as an adventurer. The franchise only got better on the third try.
Legally speaking, there aren’t many opportunities for sequels. Res judicata, better known as claim preclusion, prevents parties from relitigating a matter already decided. And depositions are no different. Generally, there will not be a sequel to a deposition on the same matter in the same lawsuit without special circumstances.
Primarily a rule of evidence, Rule 32.01 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure outlines the ways a deposition may be used at trial or in a motion hearing.2 It applies to the use of deposition testimony for cross-examination and impeachment. For all scenarios, the testimony must be admissible under the Tennessee Rules of Evidence applied as though the witness were present and testifying. Section 32.01(3) governs whether a deposition may be used as substantive proof under the former testimony exception to hearsay. If the testimony is admissible, then one permissible use is that any deposition testimony, whether the testimony of a party or nonparty, may be used by any party for any purpose if the court finds that the witness is “unavailable” as defined by Tennessee Rule of Evidence 804(a), unless the absence was procured by the party offering the deposition.
However, there is an exception to the exception in Tennessee courts. The last sentence of Rule 32.01(3), colloquially known as the Bearman Rule, prevents the introduction of discovery depositions of experts taken under Rule 26.02(4) in Tennessee state courts at trial, as substantive proof.
The Bearman Rule was recommended by Memphis attorney Leo Bearman while a member of the Rules Commission in 1984.3 The Bearman Rule was added to address a dilemma faced by a lawyer taking a discovery deposition of a hostile expert who is or becomes unavailable under the rule, including witnesses exempt from subpoena.4 Recall that Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-9-101 exempts many experts from subpoena to trial (though not depositions), including a practicing physician. The Court of Appeals has described the Bearman Rule as “a rule of fairness which permits discovery of a hostile expert without the threat of unfavorable responses being introduced as substantive proof under what is, in essence, a hearsay exception.”5 As such, it restricts the use of a discovery deposition by an adverse party or parties to impeachment. It cannot be used by the proponent of the witness as direct evidence to establish its case in chief.6
It is important to note that this express provision does not appear in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As such, absent an agreement by counsel, a discovery deposition of an expert may also be considered an evidentiary deposition to the extent permitted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32 and other evidentiary rules.
The Bearman Rule makes a sequel not just possible, but sometimes necessary. A party who hired the expert may still take a deposition for proof by notice or agreement.7
Some think that a second deposition taken for proof might be better than the first. After all, the Empire Strikes Back had more depth, intrigue, and grit than Star Wars: A New Hope. In a subsequent deposition, there is already a roadmap. A lawyer already probed the expert’s knowledge, experience, and opinions and potentially identified areas that might be used for impeachment. Maybe the sequel can clean up the “plot holes” of the first deposition. But, like Jaws II, perhaps some subsequent depositions will just never live up to the first installment. A story has already taken shape, and there may be no more to add. Reasonable minds may differ.
1 When it comes to Indiana Jones, one thing we both agree on is that it’s important to remember there are only three movies. That’s it. No Crystal Skulls. No digitally de-aged archaeologists.
2 Dial v. Harrington, 138 S.W.3d 895, 898 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003) (citing Wilkes v. Fred’s, Inc., No. W2001-02393-COA-R3-CV, 2002 Tenn. App. LEXIS 627, 2001 WL 31305202, at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 20, 2002), no perm. app. filed (other citations omitted)).
3 Donald F. Paine, The Bearman Rule, 39 Tenn. B. J. 33 (April 2003).
4 Tenn. R. Civ. P. 32 advisory commission comments
5 Harrington, 138 S.W.3d at 898 (citing Tenn. R. Civ. P. 32 advisory committee comments).
6 See Dicky v. McCord, 63 S.W.3d 714, 724 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
7 Tenn. R. Civ. P. 32 advisory commission comments.
THREE STARS
By: Melissa B. Carrasco Carrasco Trump, PLLC
BOILERPLATE MATTERS
In 1919, the Tennessee General Assembly passed a law. The 61st General Assembly had a lot on its plate. Senate Joint Resolution No. 1 ratified the 18th Amendment,1 and Tennessee joined thirty-five other states in enshrining prohibition in the U.S. Constitution. . . .at least for a few years.
House Bill No. 717, introduced by L. D. Miller of Hamilton county, would give women the right to vote in Presidential elections and municipal elections so long as they were 21 years old, had lived in the state for at least one year, had lived in the county where they were registered to vote for six months, and paid the poll tax.2 It passed, almost exactly one year before the General Assembly would reconvene to consider ratification of the 19th Amendment.
And, as if controversial subjects like prohibition and suffrage were not enough for one session of the General Assembly, the influenza pandemic of 1918 was still ravaging Nashville and other major Tennessee cities,3 thousands of World War I veterans were returning home and struggling to reacclimate to civilian life, and the “Red Summer” of race riots was sweeping America’s cities.4 The 61st General Assembly faced a lot of very important issues in 1919, and yet another one of those issues was the death penalty.
In 1915, Tennessee had outlawed the death penalty for first-degree homicide convictions and replaced it with a life sentence.5 In 1919, the General Assembly reinstated it.6 But the act that reinstated the death penalty contained what most likely considered an unimportant, standard, boilerplate severance clause – an afterthought tacked at the end of every Public Act to ensure that, if some part of the statute was ever determined to be unconstitutional, the rest of it would continue in effect in some way.7
In the 1980s, that severance clause was codified at Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-2-205(e):
In the event that any provision of §§ 39-2202 - 39-2-204, 39-2-206 or this section or the application thereof to any individual or circumstance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the Tennessee Supreme Court or a federal court, so as permanently to preclude a sentence of death as to that individual, the court having jurisdiction over such individual previously sentenced to death shall cause such individual to be brought before the proper court which shall sentence such person to imprisonment for life.8
And there, Section 39-2-205(e) sat, tucked away, for years.9 According to Lexis Nexis (which should know about these sorts of things), this severance clause has been cited in exactly one case—the case of Pervis Payne.
In 1988, Pervis Payne was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and one count of assault with the intent to commit first-degree murder.10 He was sentenced to death for the two murder convictions and 30 years of imprisonment for the assault conviction.11 The trial court ordered that the sentences were to be run consecutively, rather than concurrently as Payne’s counsel argued.12
In 2012, an expert evaluated Mr. Payne and determined that he met the statutory definition of a person with an intellectual disability.13 Mr. Payne filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis,14 but it was unsuccessful, and the finding of an intellectual disability was not considered by the trial court.15
In 2021, the Tennessee General Assembly enacted Public Act 399 which provided a procedure for individuals who had previously been
sentenced to death to petition the trial court for a determination as to whether they had an intellectual disability.16 Mr. Payne filed his petition, and after the State had him evaluated by its own expert, the State did not contest the petition.17
Thus, the trial court determined that Mr. Payne satisfied the statutory definition of having an intellectual disability.18 In 2001, the Tennessee Supreme Court had already found that the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities violated both the Tennessee and U.S. Constitutions.19 Thus, the trial court vacated the two death sentences and replaced them with two life sentences.20 But, that left the question of whether the life sentences should be served concurrently or consecutively. The trial court determined that it had the inherent authority to conduct a new sentencing hearing, and after considering numerous factors, decided that the sentences should be served concurrently.21
And that is how, in June 2025, what many would call a boilerplate severance clause from a very old statute would make its way to the forefront of a very important jurisdictional question: what jurisdiction does a trial court have after a person’s conviction and sentence have become final?22 Underlying that question is another question: where do Tennessee courts get their authority to do anything?
The Tennessee Supreme Court answered this question. Tennessee courts get their authority from statutes and rules. If a statute or a rule does not say a court can do it, then the court cannot do it.23 In this case, the Supreme Court found that the trial court had jurisdiction to determine that Mr. Payne satisfied the statutory definition of having an intellectual disability.24 After all, Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-13203(g) gives trial courts this authority once a person’s conviction is final on direct review.25 But the Supreme Court found it “significant” that the statue itself does not give the trial court jurisdiction to do anything other than determine if a person has an intellectual disability.26
Rather, Section 39-2-205(e) (1982), which was in effect when Mr. Payne was sentenced, authorized courts to do one thing once it was determined that the death penalty was unconstitutional as applied to a particular person: “[T]he court having jurisdiction over such individual previously sentenced to death shall cause such individual to be brought before the proper court which shall sentence such person to imprisonment for life.”27 Thus, the trial court only had the authority to change Mr. Payne’s sentences from the death penalty to life imprisonment. It did not have the authority to change the alignment of the sentences from consecutive to concurrent.28
Thus, the case was remanded to the trial court, and now we know why even the boilerplate language of a statute or a rule cannot be overlooked.
1 1919 Sen. J.Res. No. 1, available at https://sharetngov.tnsosfiles.com/tsla/exhibits/ prohibition/passage.htm.
2 Tenn. H.B. 717, Pub. Ch. 139 (1919), available at https://teva.contentdm.oclc.org/ digital/collection/p15138coll27/id/1171/rec/29.
3 University of Michigan Center for the History of Medicine, Influenza Encyclopedia, Nashville, Tennessee, https://www.influenzaarchive.org/cities/city-nashville.html#.
4 Margaret Ripley Wolfe, World War I, Tennessee Encyclopedia, available at https:// tennesseeencyclopedia.net/entries/world-war-i/.
5 Randall T. Noe, Tennessee’s CapiTal punishmenT hisTory and Today’s meriTed reprieve for Ts deaTh penalTy,131-32 (Lincoln Mem. L. Rev. Vol. 2, Spr. 2015); see also Taylor v. State, 995 S.W.2d 78, 82 (Tenn. 1999).
6 Id. at 132.
7 State v. Payne, No. W2022-00210-SC-R11-CD, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *18-19 (Tenn. June 16, 2025).
8 Tenn. Code Ann. §39-2-205(e) (1982), quoted in Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *18-19.
continued on page 15
HELLO MY NAME IS
By: Bridget J. Pyman Arnett | Baker
CELIA BALL CHRISTMAS
This month’s Hello My Name Is features Celia Ball Christmas, Managing Partner at Christmas Law Group PLLC. She and her husband, D.T. Christmas, practice criminal defense across East Tennessee. Celia graduated from Lincoln Memorial University Duncan School of Law in 2022 and holds a Bachelor of Arts from Eastern Kentucky University. Celia is an active member of the KBA, TBA, and TACDL. She currently co-chairs the KBA Barristers Mock Trial Committee and is part of the 2024–25 RIPPLE Cohort for the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts’ Court Improvement Program.
Celia’s interest in the law began with a mock trial in elementary school and developed through years of public speaking and debate. Today, she appears regularly in courtrooms representing clients in cases ranging from minor offenses to serious felonies. She also works to connect clients with resources addressing addiction, mental health, and other challenges that often overlap with criminal cases. Outside of her practice, Celia stays busy raising three daughters and managing the daily logistics of a growing firm, with occasional help from Bo Duke, the family’s pandemic pup.
Why did you decide to go to law school?
I’ve wanted to be an attorney since the 4th grade, when I participated in my first mock trial at the Laurel County Courthouse in London, Kentucky. My late grandfather, Darrell Ball Sr., always highly encouraged that dream, but it wasn’t until after his passing in the fall of 2018 that I finally decided to take the LSAT and apply, with three kids in tow. It was time.
Describe any significant or formative experience(s) you had during law school (or at any point in your education) that relates to your career now.
I started doing public speaking and speech competitions at a very young age. From competitions within the National FFA Organization to platforms at local pageants, I seized many opportunities to speak. I spoke about topics I was passionate about to crowds big and small. The impromptu challenges posed by these competitions prepared me for the impromptu and diverse nature of the courtrooms I see across over a dozen counties in my practice locale. Everywhere I go, the courtroom looks different, the county’s system operates differently, and the interactions I have vary as well. One thing that isn’t different is that I continue to talk about topics I’m passionate about. In those courtrooms, I am arguing motions, participating in hearings, cross-examining witnesses, and fighting for the constitutional rights of my clients.
If you could give a new law student one piece of advice, what would it be?
No one is going to care more about the development of your skills, knowledge, and career more than you. Never become complacent in seeking opportunities to advance your ability. We all enter this profession for different reasons. Know your reason(s) and let it motivate your hustle; that’s where success will find you. My compassion for others and the love I have for my family are my reasons.
What do you find most meaningful in your work?
I often encounter people at their lowest, whether it’s their first arrest
or subsequent in a troubled history they’re somehow hoping to escape. Whether someone has retained our firm’s representation or I’ve been appointed by the court, I have been entrusted the responsibility for the client’s well-being on multiple levels. The foundation of my practice is built on compassion and the fact that, sometimes, people just need someone to care. I find great meaning in having been afforded the opportunity to genuinely care for my clients.
The world is a cruel place for those suffering from mental illness, poverty, and addictions. Having faced those struggles amongst my own family and in my upbringing in Southeastern Kentucky, I know how important it is for those of us who are able to protect and support other members of our community to do so. I work diligently to connect my clients with educational resources, substance abuse treatment programs, job placement centers, and other support services that can help improve their future and create a more stable path for their families. I have such an appreciation for our local court systems that have established Recovery Courts, Mental Health Courts, and more for the same purposes. They’re invaluable. While I’ve had the misfortune to see the life of a client taken by addiction, I am so thankful for those who have found a new path. It is those occasional calls from someone simply excited to share the news that they’ve achieved sobriety or that they obtained a new job that can finally sustain their family that bring me joy. Aiding others in their successes, big and small, makes my work and the sacrifices of my family worthwhile.
Tell me about your family (spouse, partner, children, pets).
If you walked into my living room on any given Sunday, you’d find my rambunctious family of 6 piled amongst the furniture and pestering each other, often to the point of no return (almost). My husband probably has a phone in his hand, crafting the next “Attorney Christmas” Tik-Tok video. Our three girls are probably cross-examining each other about whose turn it is to unload the dishwasher. And Bo Duke, our allgrown-up COVID puppy, is bound to be rolling over until someone gives him a French fry.
Reese, 17, loves horses, F1 racing (preferably Ferraris), the nail salon, and $7 coffees. Brooke, 15, a softball catcher, finds herself most at home behind home plate. She’s also better at math than all the rest of us! Bailey, 11, surprisingly a natural blonde, is the spoiled youngest child you’d expect her to be and will never turn down a good seafood boil. Which one is going to go to law school? My money is on Brooke, for sure.
My husband, D.T., and I partnered professionally to form Christmas Law Group PLLC in late February 2024. However, we’ve worked together in some capacity since 2020, defending defendants facing charges ranging from minor traffic offenses to multiple counts of first-degree murder. Together, we’ve awaited the verdict in over a dozen jury trials. We share a great passion for our work as criminal defense attorneys. I am looking forward to seeing our firm and our family grow in the coming years.
ATTORNEY
PROFILE, continued from page 6
as a lawyer. She emphasizes the need for mentors who are present and take the time to sit down and have a conversation with you.
In court, above all else, Judge Stevens values a lawyer who is prepared and conversational. The two qualities are intertwined, as a prepared lawyer will know his or her material well enough to feel comfortable deviating from any rehearsed scripts to effectively answer a judge’s questions and relate to a jury.
While there is great concern that new forces and technology, such as AI, may threaten the roles of attorneys, Judge Stevens believes a lawyer’s ability to empathize and be human will preserve the legal profession. Unlike some other experienced legal professionals, Judge Stevens does not reject AI but instead encourages attorneys to adapt and use it as a tool while adhering to the overarching principles that make a good lawyer.
Finally, Judge Stevens advises young lawyers not only to be the best lawyers they can be, but to be the best people they can be. To do that, she believes you have to be present for your family and life outside of your career. For instance, while practicing, Judge Stevens would try to take the time to celebrate her wins, instead of simply getting started on the next case. She eats dinner with her adult daughter every Tuesday night and takes time to travel. Since the tail end of the pandemic, Judge Stevens has travelled to South Africa, Iceland, Italy, and the Pacific Northwest. Most recently, she spent four days at the beach by herself, making a point of not taking any work with her. Judge Stevens warns that a lawyer whose life revolves purely around the practice of law is destined to have a short career.
LEGAL UPDATE,
5 Press Release, Am. Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, Lambda Legal Respond to Supreme Court Ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti (June 18, 2025, 10:50 AM), https://www.aclu.org/ press-releases/aclu-lambda-legal-respond-to-supreme-court-ruling-in-u-s-vskrmetti.
6 L.W. v. Skrmetti, No. 3:23-cv-00376, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86406 (M.D. Tenn. May 16, 2023).
7 L.W. v. Skrmetti, 679 F. Supp. 3d 668, 677 (M.D. Tenn. 2023).
8 L.W. v. Skrmetti, 83 F.4th 460 (6th Cir. 2023).
9 US v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, slip op. at 10 (Roberts, C.J., op. of the Court) (U.S. June 18, 2025).
10 Bostock v. Clayton Cnty., 590 U.S. 644 (2020).
11 US v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, slip op. at 3 (Thomas, J., concurring) (U.S. June 18, 2025).
12 United States v. Carolene Products Co. See 304 U. S. 144, 152–153, n. 4 (1938)
13 US v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, slip op. at 3 (Barrett, J., concurring) (U.S. June 18, 2025).
14 US v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, slip op. at 1-31 (Sotomayor, J., dissenting) (U.S. June 18, 2025).
15 US v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477, slip op. at 1-2 (Kagan, J., dissenting) (U.S. June 18, 2025).
16 Press Release, Tenn. Off. of the Att’y Gen. & Reporter, Landmark Victory for State of Tennessee at United States Supreme Court (June 18, 2025), https://www.tn.gov/ attorneygeneral/news/2025/6/18/pr25-37.html (last visited July 8, 2025).
17 Press Release, Am. Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, Lambda Legal Respond to Supreme Court Ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti (June 18, 2025), https://www.aclu.org/pressreleases/aclu-lambda-legal-respond-to-supreme-court-ruling-in-u-s-v-skrmetti (last visited July 8, 2025).
THREE STARS, continued from page 13
9 In the 1990s the language of Section 39-2-205(e) was moved to Section 39-13206(e). See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-206(e).
10 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *4.
11 Id.
12 Id. at *5.
13 See Payne v. State, 493 S.W.3d 478, 482-83 (Tenn. 2016); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-203(a)(1) (2010) (providing the statutory definition of “intellectual disability” in 2012)
14 A writ of error coram nobis is a mechanism to bring to the trial court’s attention newly discovered evidence which, if it had been known at trial, might have resulted in a different judgment. See Pulliam v. State, No. W2016-01472-CCA-R3-ECN, 2018 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 241, at * 9 (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 29, 2018) for a very helpful explanation.
15 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *6.
16 See Act of Apr. 26, 2021, ch. 399, § 2, 2021 Tenn. Pub. Acts, codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-203(g).
17 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *9.
18 Id.
19 See Van Tran v. State, 66 S.W.3d790, 812-13 (Tenn. 2001).
20 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *9.
21 Id. at *10.
22 Id. at *11-12.
23 See id. at *13-14.
24 See id. at *16.
25 See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-203(g).
26 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *16-17.
27 Tenn. Code Ann. §39-2-205(e) (1982). The newer version of this statute, §39-13206(e) does provide for a sentencing hearing after a determination of intellectual disability.
28 Payne, 2025 Tenn. LEXIS 231, at *20-21.
NAVIGATING THROUGH THE DARK: CONTRACTUAL IP PROTECTION IN THE AGE OF GEN AI
I am an early riser, and in the morning (especially the winter) it is often so dark that I can’t see an inch in front of my face. My wife hates it when I turn on the light before 6 AM, so I try to make do, finding my clothes, glasses, and phone by feel rather than sight. I fumble with my dresser hoping to find my glasses. My hand spiders and pats around, hitting random objects. I think I’ve touched my phone, but it was really the edge of a Kleenex box, and what I thought was my water bottle is actually the lamp stand. Without the light, my mind fills in the blanks from imagination and memory.
For lawyers dealing with the developing field of Artificial Intelligence (AI), it can often feel like that--rummaging in the dark, trying to find answers by sorting through a patchwork of legislation and semi-related precedent and attempting to see patterns where little exists to provide guidance. What was new is now old, and previously used contract templates take on a different meaning with technological advancements that the drafters of those documents could have barely imagined. As the courts grapple with applying traditional copyright and trademark law to the emergent field of AI, corporate counsel must discern the practical applications and be aware of how outdated methods to protect intellectual property (IP) must be revamped in the advent of Generative AI (Gen. AI).
In theory, there is a framework for understanding the patent and copyright implications of AI. In its 2025 report, the U.S. Copyright Office affirmed that the direct output of AI, in the absence of human contribution, was not copyrightable.1 The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office stated that AI-assisted inventions could be patented if a human was significantly involved.2 To provide the simplest assessment of this guidance, the direct language and output of a Gen. AI system without human involvement would not necessarily be subject to ownership through copyright or patent, but a certain amount of human creativity combined with the output can get it over the line. Also, ideas and inventions that emerge only indirectly from AI output would be patentable and copyrightable.
District court case of Yoe v. Crescent Sock Company, a complex intellectual property dispute originating from a broken contractual relationship between two parties In the parties’ contract, there was an IP clause that stated, “Any and all new brands, and other intellectual property relating to such new brands, that are developed, registered, trademarked, copyrighted, invented, started, conceived or designed by Crescent, Yoe and/or [Yoe Enterprises]…shall be 100% owned by [Yoe Enterprises].3
The plaintiffs alleged that their trade secrets on sock design were incorporated by the defendant into other brands of socks after the contract had ended. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, their own technical experts were not able to provide sufficient evidence that the IP had been incorporated into the new designs.4 As this case originated prior to the infancy of Gen. AI, the court did not need to address the challenges that the contract provision poses for IP ownership with today’s technology. But the IP clause in that case is one that many contract lawyers still see today–– a broad list category for IP, with the addition of new IP developed in connection with a contractual relationship. Some common contract provisions may go even further, by asserting that any ideas, inventions, discoveries, that a vendor obtains resulting from the contract are the exclusive ownership of customer, or they may specify that IP which is generated using property of both parties becomes jointly owned. But while Yoe v Crescent Sock Company addressed how designs of socks may have been incorporated into work utilizing a needle machine, today, courts would need to take the even more complicated next step of analyzing how work can be incorporated indirectly using stored information from Gen. AI systems.
Although these concepts sound simple, the practical application is not as straightforward. Questions naturally emerge: what is the level of human involvement necessary to justify ownership? Assuming we could get a clear answer on that, how would that be verified? Contract law, while intersecting with copyright and patent legal theory, can bring further ambiguity to an already scattershot legal landscape. Businesses need to protect their IP, which they do through NDAs, terms and conditions in a contract, or compliance agreements. But those IP boilerplate clauses which may have been sufficient protection prior to the abilities of AI systems, now create challenges.
Take for example, the contract provisions in the Tennessee U.S.
Until recently, electronic tools did not learn or adapt in the traditional sense, so the risk to a party’s future IP due to stored information may have been minimal. But with machine learning capabilities, Gen. AI can now store all information added to it, and has the capacity to recognize patterns, reach conclusions, optimize practices, predict future behavior, and automate repetitive functions.5 Because inputs can affect the future behavior of the Gen. AI system, if a company uses the same AI program for one customer with a contract that specifies any inventions resulting from work performed for the customer will be exclusive property of that customer, then the ownership of the IP could be in dispute if the data is stored by the AI system and synthesized for future prompts for other customers.
As an illustration, imagine if the Yoe v. Crescent Sock Company dispute occurred today. Suppose that Crescent Sock Company utilized a Gen. AI program to develop ideas regarding sock design, brand, and material by inputting detailed specifications. Crescent provides additional prompts and corrections to its AI program through back-and-forth
modifications, prompts, and clarifications until eventually they have a design that meets their intent and maximizes profits. The term of the contract ends, and the parties go their separate ways.
Later, Crescent wants to develop a new brand of sock and utilizes the same Gen. AI program to help with development and design. Partially based on the previous information provided about the success and intent of the designs during the Yoe contract, the AI program synthesizes that with new output information for this future design. Who would own the design? Although the term of the contract has ended, would the information that was stored and synthesized by AI during the course of the contract constitute IP that was developed during the course of the contract thus resulting in ownership being transferred to the other party? There is no easy answer to this question, and it is one of the reasons that lawyers should review these contract clauses with a new understanding about how AI’s machine learning may affect ownership of IP.
Corporate counsel need to be vigilant with reviewing IP clauses in their contracts to ensure that the language does not open the door to an unintended IP ownership transfer. Unfortunately, there are few certainties when it comes to ownership of IP in the age of AI, but reducing that uncertainty through clearly defined and purposed contract provisions is necessary. Below are a few common-sense tips for corporate counsel in keeping their clients compliant and protected:
• Keep up to date with technological changes in the field of AI.
COVER STORY
By: Alexander Nicoll AESSEAL, Inc.
• Audit AI systems that are utilized by the corporation to assess the degree that use may conflict with current contract provisions or put the corporation’s IP at risk.
• Review corporate IP terms in standard terms and conditions on a periodic basis with an understanding of the abilities of AI.
• Ensure that clients understand how the abilities of AI may affect their IP.
Hopefully, as more caselaw emerges, we will have a more reliable framework for advising in this new field of technology. But until then, lawyers must do the best they can with what they have at their disposal, even if it involves navigating through the dark.
1 U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability, https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-IntelligencePart-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf)
2 Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions, Notice by the Patent and Trademark Office, https://www.federalregister.gov/ documents/2024/02/13/2024-02623/inventorship-guidance-for-ai-assistedinventions
3 Yoe v. Crescent Sock Co., No. 1:15-CV-3-SKL, 2017 WL 5473455, at *20–21 (E.D. Tenn. Nov. 14, 2017), order vacated in part on reconsideration, 314 F. Supp. 3d 892 (E.D. Tenn. 2018)
4 Id. at 20
5 AI Key Legal Issues: Overview (US), Practical Law Practice Note Overview w-0181743
PRACTICE TIPS
By: Thomas H. Dickenson Hodges, Daughty & Carson, PLLC
TENNESSEE CHANGES FORECLOSURE STATUTE
Effective July 1, 2025, changes go into effect for Tennessee’s nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings.1 This article will address the most important changes
Until the statute was amended, three newspaper advertisements were required prior to the actual foreclosure sale. Now, only two such ads are required,2 but a posting online by a third-party internet posting company (for at least 20 continuous days) has been added.3
The new requirements apparently do not apply to any notice published in accordance with any contract entered into prior to the effective date of the statute and expressed in a mortgage deed of trust or other legal instrument.4
The statutory changes preserved the right to postpone a sale, but if you do so, then the postponement must be to a specified date and time, must be announced by posting with the third-party internet posting company, and announced at the date, time and location of each adjourned sale date—unless the sale is postponed for less than 5 days after the original sale date.5 In addition, if the sale is postponed for more than 30 days, the new sale date particulars must be mailed to the debtor no less than 10 calendar days prior to the new sale date.6
The Tennessee Secretary of State (SOS) was tagged with the responsibility of creating a listing on the SOS website of the thirdparty internet posting companies, who submit their root domain website address to the SOS prior to conducting business under the new foreclosure regime.7 Those companies can be found at sos.tn.gov/ publications/foreclosure-listing-companies.
The final new requirement is that the foreclosure notice must state what internet posting company is being utilized to satisfy the new requirement that an internet posting of the foreclosure be done in conjunction with the newspaper advertisement.8
It will be important to investigate options available for the internet posting of a foreclosure because the prices vary. In a check on July 1, which was the first date the SOS posted its list of vendors, one company charged $399, one charged $150, one vendor only advertised for its own foreclosures, and more than one vendor did not even have their sites up and running. In addition, you need to know if you will get a certification of the internet posting, much like is done now with the affidavit of publication you receive from a newspaper with a newspaper advertisement. And, if a certification is provided, whether it will be included in the cost or an extra charge.
The statutory amendment also includes a damages provision. An internet posting company may be liable for any damages resulting from the company’s failure to comply with subsection (f) of the first section in the statute. However, that subsection only covers the requirement that the third-party internet provider submit its root domain website address to the SOS prior to conducting business pursuant to the foreclosure statute. Thus, it is hard to imagine damages caused by a failure to comply.
Finally, the statute now defines what “location” means when it comes to the place where a foreclosure sale is to take place.9 It can be the physical place where a sale is being conducted or the website of an internet-based bidding platform if the sale is being conducted online.10 For the time being, it is unlikely there will be many, if any, online foreclosure auctions because virtually all deeds of trust at present do not contemplate an online foreclosure auction process. It remains to be seen whether lenders will start adding that option as an alternative to the traditional on-the-steps-of-the-courthouse foreclosure auction.
1 Public Chapter No. 515.
2 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(a)(1).
3 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(a)(2).
4 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(c)(2).
5 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(e)(2).
6 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(e)(3).
7 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(f)(1) and (2).
8 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-104(a)
9 Tenn. Code Ann. § 35-5-101(g).
10 Id.
SCHOOLED IN ETHICS
By: Judy M. Cornett University of Tennessee College of Law
HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY
“Honesty [is] in truth the best policy.” This quote from Benjamin Franklin holds true in the practice of law.1 Indeed, the Rules of Professional Conduct require lawyers to act honestly. Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 8, RPC 8.4(c) provides: “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: . . . engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation . . . .”2 Rule 3.3(a)(1) provides: “A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal . . . .”
But it is sometimes tempting to be dishonest, especially (1) when being less than honest may gain an advantage for your client; and (2) when being honest reveals your own wrongdoing or negligence. Recently, two Tennessee lawyers learned that honesty is indeed the best policy, even in these two situations.
In Marquardt v. University of Tennessee, 3 the plaintiff filed a request for documents under the Tennessee Public Records Act. An engineering professor at UTK found a 50-year-old issue of the Mining Congress Journal and realized that it contained information related to climate change4:
There is evidence that the amount of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere is increasing rapidly as a result of the combustion of fossil fuels. . . . If the future rate of increase continues as it is at the present, it has been predicted that, because the CO2 envelope reduces radiation, the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere will increase and that vast changes in the climates of the earth will result. . . . Such changes in temperature will cause melting of the polar icecaps, which, in turn, would result in the inundation of many coastal cities, including New York and London.5
The UTK professor shared the journal with Elan Young, “a part-time employee of the university who also worked as a freelance journalist.”6 Young then authored an article for the Huffington Post called “Coal Knew, Too.”7
The plaintiff made a public records request to UT, seeking emails to and from the professor regarding the journal. UT denied the request on the ground that the emails were not public records under the act. The plaintiff sought judicial review, and the trial court ordered UT to produce the requested materials under seal for an in camera review.8 The trial court ruled that the emails were not public records, and the plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals.
While reviewing the appellate record, the plaintiff’s attorney realized that the materials that had been filed under seal in the trial court “had been inadvertently placed in the public record instead of being maintained under seal by the circuit court clerk.”9 Instead of reviewing the materials, which would clearly have advantaged her client, she “notified counsel for UTK that the Materials on file with the circuit court clerk were accessible to the public and not under seal.”10 In its opinion affirming the trial court, the Court of Appeals dropped a footnote stating, “We credit [the attorney’s] professionalism for respecting that the trial court had placed the Materials under seal, which order remained in effect in spite of the clerk’s office inadvertently placing the Materials in the public file.”11 Honesty was indeed the best policy.
Another attorney learned that honesty sometimes requires that we admit our own errors, no matter how embarrassing. This attorney represented defendants in General Sessions Court and calendared the wrong trial date.12 When neither he nor his clients showed up, the court entered a default judgment. In the laconic words of the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility, the attorney “was not forthright in his subsequent communications with his clients that the trial date was
missed solely due to his own scheduling error.”13 This failure to come clean with his clients violated Rule 1.4(a)(3), which provides that “[a] lawyer shall . . . keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter.”
It was bad enough to hide his error from his clients, but things went from bad to worse when he misrepresented the truth to the court. The attorney filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, and in the accompanying affidavit, he “falsely claimed that the trial date was missed due to confusion with opposing counsel rather than [his] own scheduling error.”14 The attorney next attempted to cast blame on his clients. In his motion to withdraw, he “falsely claimed that [his] clients failed to provide documentation in support of their factual position that would have been asserted at trial.”15 These assertions violated Rule 3.3(a)(1), which provides: “A lawyer shall not knowingly: make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal . . . .”
Reviewing the attorney’s conduct, the Board found a panoply of violations and issued a public censure.16
Bottom line: Benjamin Franklin was right. Resist the temptation to help your client or protect yourself at the price of the truth. Honesty yields praise. Dishonesty leads to censure. Act accordingly.
1 Benjamin Franklin, Comparison of America and Great Britain as to Credit, in 1777, available at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-24-02-0397. Interestingly, Franklin used the quote to explain why American merchants were right to repay debts owing to British merchants during the Revolutionary War: Injuries from Ministers should not be reveng’d on Merchants who were our Friends; . . . the Credit was in consequence of private Contracts made in Confidence of good Faith; , , , these ought to be held sacred and faithfully comply’d with; for that whatever publick Utility might be suppos’d to arise from a Breach of private Faith, it was unjust, and would in the End be found unwise, Honesty being in truth the best Policy.
2 Like most rules, this one is subject to an exception, set out in comment [5]: “In some circumstances, however, prosecutors are authorized by law to use, or to direct investigative agents to use, investigative techniques that might be regarded as deceitful. This Rule does not prohibit such conduct.”
3 Marquardt v. Univ. of Tenn., No. E2024-00891-COA-R3-CV, 2025 WL 1743231 (Mar. 24, 2025).
4 Id. at *1.
5 Quoted in Elan Young, Coal Knew, Too, in HuffPost (Nov. 22, 2019, updated Dec. 16, 2019) (quoting James R. Garvey, President of Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.), available at https://www.huffpost.com/entry/coal-industry-climate-change_n_5dd6 bbebe4b0e29d7280984f
6 Marquardt, 2025 WL 1743231, at *1.
7 Elan Young, Coal Knew, Too, in HuffPost (Nov. 22, 2019, updated Dec. 16, 2019), available at https://www.huffpost.com/entry/coal-industry-climate-change_n_5dd6 bbebe4b0e29d7280984f
8 Id. The opinion states that the trial court ordered an “in camera review,” but does not specify that the documents were filed under seal until discussing the attorney’s actions. Id. at *2.
9 Id. at *2.
10 Id.
11 Id. n.4. This scenario also parallels the “misdirected fax” situation. Rule 4.4(b) counsels that the attorney must (1) immediately terminate review or use of the information; (2) notify the person, or the person’s lawyer if communication with the person is prohibited by RPC 4.2, of the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure; and (3) abide by that person’s or lawyer’s instructions with respect to disposition of written information or refrain from using the written information until obtaining a definitive ruling on the proper disposition from a court with appropriate jurisdiction.
12 Davidson County Lawyer Censured, Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility (June 25, 2025).
13 Id.
14 Id.
15 Id.
16 Id.
MONTHLY MEET-UP
Plan to attend the Barristers monthly meet-up on Wednesday, August 13, starting at 5:15 pm at The Firefly, the outdoor patio at the Hilton, located at 501 W. Church Avenue, Knoxville. Social time starts at 5:00 pm. All Barristers members are invited to attend, meet fellow attorneys, and learn about upcoming Barristers events.
VETERANS LEGAL ADVICE CLINIC
The Veterans’ Legal Advice Clinic is a joint project of the KBA/ Barristers Access to Justice Committees, Legal Aid of East Tennessee, the Knox Co. Public Defender’s Community Law Office, the UT College of Law, LMU- Duncan School of Law, and the local Veterans Affairs office. This is a general advice and referral clinic that requires attorney volunteers for its continued operation. The next Veterans Legal Clinic will be held in person at the Knoxville Community Law Office on August 13, 2025. Sign up at knoxbar.org/Volunteer.
MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE HOLDS SUMMER PARTY AT JIG & REEL
- 8:00 p.m. at Jig & Reel in the Old City (101 S. Central Street). This event is sponsored by Stivers Wealth Management.
Reel! The Summer Party is open to all KBA members and their guests. A ticket includes dinner and a drink ticket. Register by going to the event calendar at knoxbar.org/events.
VOLUNTEER BREAKFAST COMMITTEE SEEKS SPONSORS FOR NEW OUTREACH
committee has been able to provide a warm meal to those in need through our long-standing partnership with the Volunteer Ministry Center. Now, they’re expanding their efforts by offering two additional sponsorship opportunities at the same $150 cost: CareCuts of Knoxville and Grow Free Tennessee - Family Table Program.
For both of these programs, the Volunteer Breakfast Committee can assist with logistics, whether that means shopping for and delivering essential items to CareCuts or shopping and preparing meals for the Family Table program.
If your firm or organization is interested in sponsoring or learning more about these opportunities, please reach out to co-chairs Miranda Goodwin (mirandaegoodwin@gmail.com) or Bridget Pyman (bpyman@ arnettbaker.com).
MANAGEMENT COUNSEL: LAW PRACTICE 101
By: Jimmy Snodgrass Kramer Rayson LLP
SHIFT IN OVERSIGHT FOR COMPLAINTS OF DISCRIMINATION WITHIN TENNESSEE
The Tennessee Human Rights Commission (THRC) has been responsible for addressing complaints of discrimination in employment, public accommodations, and public housing. However, as of June 30, 2025, the THRC will be effectively dissolved, and these responsibilities largely will be transferred to a newly created division of the state Attorney General’s Office.
Civil rights enforcement duties will now be transferred to the Attorney General’s Office, while Title VI compliance duties will be transferred to the state Department of Human Resources. This is a result of HB 0910/SB0861, which was signed by Governor Lee on May 12, 2025. The newly created Division of Civil Rights Enforcement within the Office of the Attorney General will be responsible for enforcing the Tennessee Human Rights Act (THRA) and the Tennessee Disability Act (TDA).
The signed legislation amends Title 4, Chapter 21 of the Tennessee Code. New language in Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-203 authorizes the creation of the Civil Rights Enforcement Division, which is “headed by a director of civil rights enforcement who is appointed by, and serves at the pleasure of, the attorney general.” The deadline to file complaints of discrimination (180 days after the commission of the alleged discriminatory practice) is not altered by this bill. Penalties for noncompliance with a request for information by the Civil Rights Enforcement Division are set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-205. Newly amended Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-302 describes the Attorney General’s right to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the state to prevent acts or practices in violation of the THRA. Lastly, under soon-tobe-enacted Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-1201, (1) any complaint that is pending before the THRC on June 30, 2025, is terminated and is of no legal effect; and (2) if the THRC did not hold a hearing on the pending complaint, the complainant may re-file the complaint with the office of the Attorney General or file a private civil action pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-21-311 within ninety days of July 1, 2025.
As described in the official press release, the THRC was established in 1963 during the Civil Rights Movement and has “investigated tens of thousands of cases of discrimination, earned millions in monetary benefits for people experiencing injustice, and has provided hundreds of educational presentations to complaining parties and responding parties alike.”1 Additionally, the THRC has been governed by an appointed Board of Commissioners.
So, what does this transition mean for employers going forward?
At the outset, the responsibilities of the THRC will be transferred to the Civil Rights Enforcement Division, although the Attorney General’s Office has listed numerous job postings for various positions since the bill was signed. What is worth watching, however, is the effect that this transfer will have on the investigation and enforcement of complaints of discrimination within the state of Tennessee. Critics of the bill questioned the transition to an office led by a political appointee, as opposed to the independent THRC. Conversely, “Republican Sen. John Stevens of Huntingdon, cosponsor of the legislation, noted that different divisions of the Attorney General’s office would operate independently of one another.”2 Other articles discussing the enactment of the bill debated the change from the independent nature of the THRC versus potential increased efficiency in the response, investigation, and adjudication of civil rights complaints after the transition to the Attorney General’s Office.3 The website for the Civil Rights Enforcement Division of the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office will be newly updated as of July 1, 2025, so it will be helpful to review any published guidance.4
2 See Anita Wadhwani, Bill to give Tennessee AG civil rights oversight draws Democratic pushback over partisanship, Tennessee Lookout (Apr. 10, 2025), available at https://tennesseelookout.com/2025/04/10/bill-to-give-tennessee-agcivil-rights-oversight-draws-democratic-pushback-over-partisanship/.
3 See Hope Salman, Tennessee bill shifts discrimination case oversight from HRC to Attorney General, News Channel 9 ABC Chattanooga (Apr. 5, 2025), available at https://newschannel9.com/news/local/tennessee-bill-shifts-discrimination-caseoversight-from-hrc-to-attorney-general?photo=1.
4 https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/cred.html
About this column: “The cobbler’s children have no shoes.” This old expression refers to the fact that a busy cobbler will be so busy making shoes for his customers that he has no time to make some for his own children. This syndrome can also apply to lawyers who are so busy providing good service to their clients that they neglect management issues in their own offices. The goal of this column is to provide timely information on management issues. If you have an idea for a future column, please contact Jimmy Snodgrass at jsnodgrass@kramer-rayson.com.
WELL READ
By: Devin DeVore Easter & DeVore
RED DEAD’S HISTORY: A VIDEO GAME, AN OBSESSION, AND AMERICA’S VIOLENT PAST
Like the outlaws it portrays robbing a train using a box full of dynamite, Rockstar Games’ Red Dead Redemption II blasted onto the video game scene in 2018 to universal acclaim, quickly becoming one of the top-selling video games of all time.1 It is easy to see why. The game allows you to play as an outlaw trying to live free from the restraints of civilization under the fading light of the 19th century through an immersive, open-world environment that takes you across fictional versions of the American West, New Orleans, Cuba, and Appalachia.
Like many of us trying to figure out how to spend countless hours secluded in our homes during COVID, Dr. Tore Olsson, a professor and historian at the University of Tennessee, spent his time in seclusion jumping back into the world of video games. It was then that he picked up Red Dead Redemption II. Impressed and surprised by the topics the game explored – women’s suffrage, the expansion of corporate capitalism, and the dispossession of Native peoples – Professor Olsson came up with the idea to teach an undergraduate class at the university using Red Dead Redemption II and its predecessor as a vehicle to explore American History from 1880 through 1920. Enrollment in the class exploded as soon as it was announced. Building on the class’s overwhelming success, Professor Olsson then decided to write a book to present the historical themes explored within the Red Dead Redemption games beyond the classroom. That endeavor culminated in Red Dead’s History: A Video Game, an Obsession, and America’s Violent Past
After reading the book, it’s clear why Professor Olsson’s class is so popular among students. Professor Olsson masterfully weaves the video games’ locations, characters, and scenarios to explore topics that are exciting, somber, and, in many cases, essential to understanding this history of the United States. Such exciting topics include famous outlaws, cowboys, gunslingers, the Pinkertons, and the infamous feud between the Hatfields and the McCoys. I especially loved the “Wild Bunch” chapter, as it was there where I discovered a shared heritage with Butch Cassidy. Both Cassidy and I grew up in Utah and are the descendants of LatterDay Saint (Mormon) immigrants from Scotland and England. While we both left Utah in search of glory, our shared paths seem to have ended there; I have yet to rob a train.
As exciting as these chapters are, it’s the weightier topics where Professor Olsson’s work truly shines. Throughout these chapters, he successfully conveys why knowing and understanding minority experiences and voices is so key to fully grasping our history. As stated earlier, Red Dead’s History includes chapters on the Indian Wars, women’s suffrage, and dispelling harmful myths surrounding Appalachia. Professor Olsson additionally dedicates an entire section to highlighting race relations and historical memory in the South. By doing so, he takes advantage of Red Dead Redemption II’s romp through a fictional city replicating New Orleans to explore the history of white supremacy, lynching, chain gangs, and segregation. One of his most important chapters in this section surrounds “The Lost Cause” narrative and discussion concerning Civil War Monuments. As someone with East Tennessee ancestors who fought for the Confederacy, this chapter was especially salient. While there is much discussion as to whether removing monuments and statues will destroy history or erase one’s heritage from American memory, Professor Olsson convincingly argues which narrative surrounding Civil War monuments is founded in myth, and which is
founded in history.
These topics are so crucial because Red Dead’s History comes to us during a period when American History is in the crosshairs of the current culture wars. The previously obscure academic legal theory “Critical Race Theory” has become a boogeyman to curtail any discussion surrounding race within our schools.2 Due to recent budget cuts, public universities are gutting programs that include American Studies, Religious Studies, African American Studies, Gender Studies, language, and art.3 West Virginia’s Humanities Council was recently forced to suspend grantmaking due to cuts in the federal budget. Those grants were essential to supporting local museums and historical markers within the state.4 Even the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), once the most reliable source for funding historical projects, canceled almost all existing grants this year in order to comply with the current Administration’s executive orders.5 The only projects that will now be considered for funding are those that promote “our nation’s extraordinary heritage.”6 Any other projects need not apply.
While writing this piece, I even received an alert on my phone that felt too pertinent for comfort. The alert announced: “Trump White House Calls Out Smithsonian for Pushing ‘One-Sided, Divisive Narratives.’”7 Such claims were made by Lindsey Halligan, a Floridabased insurance defense attorney, a previous attorney for President Trump, and now “Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Special Assistant to the President and Senior Associate Staff Secretary” appointed by President Trump to oversee the Smithsonian’s content.8 Her only credentials are that she is an “avid – and well-read – fan of history.”9
As big of a mouthful as Halligan’s title may be, her position over the Smithsonian reflects an important issue: the legal profession and history are intricately interwoven. Many lawyers, like me, received their undergraduate degrees in history. Lawyers and judges have referred to history time and again when arguing and deciding significant legal cases. Popular legal theories hold that we should look to history when interpreting text, case law, and the Constitution.
Considering how much history is connected with our profession, it’s vital that we have an accurate and comprehensive understanding of our history. Professor Tore C. Olsson’s Red Dead’s History proves to be not just an accessible launchpad to presenting such a history, but, most importantly, an incredibly entertaining and provocative one as well.
1 Jordan Sirani, The 10 Best-Selling Video Games of All Time (Aug. 11, 2024, updated Feb. 18, 2025), https://www.ign.com/articles/best-selling-video-games-of-all-timegrand-theft-auto-minecraft-tetris, last visited July 10, 2025; Metacritic.com, Red Dead Redemption II, https://www.metacritic.com/game/red-dead-redemption-2/, last visited July 10, 2025.
2 Olivia Waxman, ‘Critical Race Theory is Simply the Latest Bogeyman.” Inside the, Fight over What Kids Learn About America’s History, (Time June 24, 2021), https:// time.com/magazine/us/6075407/july-5th-2021-vol-198-no-1-u-s/, last visited July 10, 2025.
3 Michael T. Nietzel, Indiana University to Discontinue more than 100 Academic Programs, Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2025/07/01/ indiana-university-to-discontinue-more-than-100-academic-programs/, last visited July 10, 2025.
4 Shelby Burrough, West Virginia Humanities Council Suspends Grants Amid Federal Funding Cuts (WHCS Fox 11 Apr. 14, 2025) https://wchstv.com/news/local/westvirginia-humanities-council-suspends-grants-amid-federal-funding-cuts, last visited July 11, 2025.
PRO BONO SPOTLIGHT
By: Clint Wren Legal Aid of East Tennessee
THE CASES WE PLACE
From time to time, it is good to let the local legal community know the types of cases staffed at the Pro Bono program at Legal Aid of East Tennessee and provide examples of those case types.
All of our cases at the Pro Bono Project must conform to rules set by the Legal Services Corporation (LSC). The major points are that clients must meet income eligibility guidelines, be citizens or legal residents of the United States, and reside in our service area: Sevier, Loudon, Blount, and Knox counties. While there are rare exceptions—such as cases of present domestic violence—all of the clients we serve are indigent neighbors.
The Pro Bono team is always excited to meet new attorneys willing to give their time and talents to these neighbors. I encourage you to take a look at the cases we tend to place with volunteers and see how you could best serve our community. If you are interested in any of these types of cases, send me an email at cwren@laet.org. You can also go to our website to learn more about the Pro Bono team and the Legal Aid of East Tennessee team in general at https://www.laet.org/
Conservatorships: We only take uncontested conservatorships, and to participate in our program, we require clients provide a doctor’s note certifying that the party requires the requested conservatorship. If needed, we can recruit a pro bono Guardian Ad Litem to assist. Most of these clients are seeking conservatorship over an elderly family member no longer able to care for themselves as they age. There are also many clients seeking conservatorship over their child who is turning 18 but is unable to handle their own affairs. This is potentially the biggest area of need, so please reach out if you would like to assist our clients or learn how to assist them.
Adoption: We only place uncontested adoptions. Prior to placement, we require proof to ensure that the parties have agreed to an adoption.
Name Changes: We will place uncontested name changes through our program or involve them in a name change clinic. Most of these cases involves women changing their names after domestic violence issues and parents changing their children’s names to reflect their new family circumstances.
Bankruptcy: The quarterly bankruptcy clinic assists many people with bankruptcy needs, but the calls for Debt Relief and Bankruptcy assistance is outpacing the number of clients we can reasonably assist at in-person clinics.
Divorces: We always welcome attorneys willing to take uncontested divorces. There is an extremely high demand for help with divorces, and we hope to do more with an extra volunteer or two.
Miscellaneous: As you have certainly experienced, sometimes clients come to your door with a case that does not neatly fit a category. We are no different! We have applicants call for help with landlord and tenant disputes, contract disputes, wage issues, benefits issues, and anything else you can imagine. If you are interested in volunteering but are not sure if you would be a good fit because your practice is niche, please reach out anyway. I imagine I have a case or two that could fit your specific area of practice!
As you have probably noticed, we do our best to pair volunteers with cases that are not overly burdensome or complicated. You can change someone’s life drastically without involving yourself in years-long litigation. In fact, you can change several lives this way! Again, please consider reaching out to me (cwren@laet.org) if you are interested in finding how you can give your time. I would love to discuss any questions you have and make it as easy as possible for you to say “yes” to pro bono work.
Upcoming Clinic Opportunities
Legal Advice Clinic for Veterans: In person at the Public Defender’s Community Law Office at 1101 Liberty Street in Knoxville. Phone advice options available. • To sign up, please use the form on the KBA Website or email cwren@laet.org.
• Wednesdays, August 13, October 8, and December 10 Noon – 2:00 PM
Virtual Debt Relief Clinic: Via Zoom with specific dates to be announced soon. Contact cwren@laet.org if you are interested in participating.
Virtual Name Change Clinic: Via Zoom with specific dates to be announced soon. Contact cwren@laet.org if you are interested in participating.
Debt Relief Clinic: In person at the Public Defender’s Community Law Office at 1101 Liberty Street in Knoxville. • To sign up, please email cwren@laet.org. • Saturdays September 13, November 15 9AM – Noon.
Estate Planning Clinic: Lincoln Memorial University Duncan School of Law at 601 W Summit Hill Dr. Contact cwren@laet.org if you are interested in participating. • August – Specific Date TBD
By: Angelia Nystrom East Tennessee Foundation
LET THEM EAT CAKE!
When I packed up my life and moved off to law school—back in what I affectionally refer to as the Stone Age—I could not have been more unprepared for actual life. I could argue a point, diagram a sentence, do relatively complex math, and write a pretty decent essay. But basic survival skills? Not so much.
I had never washed a load of clothes. I didn’t know the difference between hot and cold settings, and I wouldn’t have known how to add detergent even if I did. I had never changed the sheets on a bed—always a perk of living at home where the laundry fairies magically did that for you. And I had definitely, most certainly, never cooked a thing. The microwave was my best friend, and even it had buttons I didn’t quite understand.
Before I left for school, my aunt gave me a book, Where’s Mom Now that I Need Her? It was half survival manual, half love letter to clueless young adults like me, and it had it all: how to get stains out of clothes, who to call when certain things went wrong, how to know when you needed a doctor versus a first aid kit, and how to do some basic things in the kitchen. It even included some very simple recipes that someone like me should have been able to make.
I cannot tell you that I tried any of them during my 1L year. My diet consisted of Lean Cuisines, Diet Cokes, Kudos bars (or, to quote my grandmother, “glorified candy bars that will do nothing but make you gain weight”), and a whole lot of takeout. While I did not gain weight (the Lean Cuisines and Diet Cokes canceled out the Kudos bars), my pocketbook got a whole lot lighter.
After a financial intervention by the parents, I was put on a budget as a 2L. Turns out, Lean Cuisines and take-out aren’t the most economical choices. So, I started trying those basic recipes and found that I could actually do a few things pretty well. I started easy—spaghetti with sauce from a jar and cheese bread—and then graduated to more complex foods like turkey and dressing and mashed potatoes. My roommate said she had never seen yellow mashed potatoes and that she had never had any quite as good as mine (one part potatoes/ two sticks of butter will do that).
By 3L year, I had caught the cooking bug. I subscribed to Living and even started purchasing their cookbooks. Cooking became a sort of therapy. It was an easy way for me to unwind. I would pore over recipes the way I would pore over constitutional law, except with recipes, there were treats involved. It was love.
And my favorite part was cake. Marie Antionette may or may not have said, “Let them eat cake!” However, it became my motto. And I found the perfect recipe for a 20-something novice.
Tucked into one of those Southern Living compilations was a recipe for Lemon Poppyseed Cake with Lemon Glaze, and it changed everything for me. First of all, it started with a boxed cake mix, which felt like training wheels I was happy to keep using. But it also included a few additions that made it feel homemade—real lemon juice, yogurt for tang and texture, and poppyseeds that added just the right touch of something special. I made it once, then twice, and then over and over. If I had to take something to a gathering, that was the thing. People asked for the recipe. People expected the cake.
Years have passed since those early days in law school, and thankfully I can now wash clothes (and I wash a lot of clothes), change sheets, and cook an entire meal without breaking a sweat. I’ve learned to make most everything from scratch. My pantry is filled with whole ingredients, and I avoid processed foods whenever I can.
make it, I remember the excitement of discovering that I could cook and that I could create something beautiful and delicious on my own. Whether you are a novice or a seasoned pro, I offer this cake to you. It is moist, easy to make, and always a crowd pleaser. It requires no fancy tools, no obscure ingredients, and no prior culinary experience.
To make the cake, you will need 1 (18.5 ounce) package yellow cake mix, ½ cup sugar, 1/3 cup vegetable oil, ¼ cup water, 1 cup plain nonfat yogurt, 1 cup egg substitute, 5 tbsp lemon juice, and 2 tbsp poppyseeds (this cake is great without them, too). For the lemon glaze, you will need 1 cup sifted powdered sugar and 4 tbsp lemon juice.
To begin, combine cake mix and sugar in a large bowl. Add vegetable oil, water, nonfat yogurt, egg substitute, and lemon juice. Beat at medium speed with an electric mixer for six minutes. Stir in poppyseeds (if desired).
Pour mixture into a 10-cup Bundt pan coated with cooking spray. Bake at 350° for 40 minutes or until a wooden toothpick inserted into the center comes out clean. Cool in pan on a wire rack for 10 minutes,
For the lemon glaze, combine the sifted powdered sugar and lemon
After all these years, this cake is still a favorite. It’s the one Trace asks for, and it is the one that Hugh cannot quit eating. I hope you give it
But this cake? This cake has stood the test of time. Every time I
TOP TEN
By: Jason Long Lewis Thomason
TOP TEN WAYS YOU KNOW YOU ARE DEALING WITH A SOUTHERN LAWYER
If you have never been to an ABA convention (or other similar national gathering of lawyers), you should put it on your list to go to one at some point. It is an opportunity to expand your network, make new friends, share best practices, and attend some really good parties. It also affords a glimpse at what the practice of law looks like in other regions. For me, understanding practice in other regions only makes me more thankful that I am a southern lawyer through and through. We have a distinctive style here which permeates every facet of life, including the way we practice law, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Accordingly, this month’s Top Ten list is the top ten ways you know you are dealing with a southern lawyer:
10. War stories. Lawyers around the world love telling a good war story, regaling the listener with past success, or even failures, and often billing for the time spent telling the story. However, southern lawyers are natural storytellers and have a panache for painting vivid and dramatic tales. KBA lawyers like Bob Ritchie and Bernie Bernstein could hold court for hours telling stories more entertaining than any Broadway production.
9. Directions. Forget Waze and Google Maps. Ask a southern lawyer how to get to a rural county courthouse and see what happens. Directions will be given over four different routes, referencing landmarks that no longer exist, and a commentary on how “good” a particular road is.
8. Food. Any good southern lawyer will know where to find a good meal and often takes the time to sit down and share it with you. From fried chicken to biscuits and gravy or homemade peach cobbler, you can spot a good southern lawyer by what they eat.
7. Bartering. When I was a second-year attorney, a pro bono client brought me two pecan pies to thank me for my work. I hate pecan pie (I know, that makes me slightly less southern), but the effort and thought was greatly appreciated and made me feel like a regular Atticus Finch. Don’t get me wrong, we southern lawyers like money, but a good barter exchange can be satisfying.
6. Strong relationships. Go down to the courthouse with a true southern lawyer, and they will chat up everyone they see: security of-
5 Press Release, National Endowment for the Humanities, Funding Priorities and the Agency’s Recent Implementation of Trump Administration Executive Orders (Apr. 24, 2025), https://www.neh.gov/news/update-neh-funding-priorities-and-agencysrecent-implementation-trump-administration-executive, last visited July 11, 2025.
6 National Endowment for the Humanities, Funding Opportunities for Individuals, Public Scholars, https://www.neh.gov/grants/research/public-scholar-program, last visited July 11, 2025.
7 Jasmine Baehr, Trump White House Calls Out Smithsonian for Pushing One-Sided Divisive Political Narratives (Fox News July 5, 2025, https://www.foxnews.com/ politics/exclusive-trump-white-house-calls-out-smithsonian-pushing-one-sideddivisive-political-narratives, last visited July 11, 2025.
ficers, clerks, court reporters, bailiffs, and even the guy off the street just looking to get in from the rain. A southern lawyer enjoys the communal aspect of the practice and knows that building relationships can only help.
5. Clothing. I am the last person to discuss fashion with anyone, and it would be malpractice per se for me to make any commentary on women’s fashion in this column. I’ll leave it at this—if you see even a hint of seersucker, you are dealing with a southern lawyer.
4. Football. Southern lawyers know their football, more particularly college football. If you aren’t able to speak intelligently about the Vols, Bulldogs, Crimson Tide, or Florida Gators and who on the depth chart recently signed an NIL deal with Piggly Wiggly, you are probably going to feel left out in a room full of southern lawyers.
3. Family. You can tell a southern lawyer by their reference to family. We always want to know “who your people are” and odds are, if we go back far enough, we can trace a connection (“My uncle played football for your grandaddy” and “My cousin used to go to Sunday School with your sister”). Family is important in the South and we remember it.
2. Eloquence. A genteel southern drawl is more compelling and persuasive than any other accent I know. Our voices drip with honey in the South, and a good closing argument can sound like a song that fills the heart.
1. Gentility. I know southern lawyers who are fierce advocates, refusing to back down from an argument they believe in, no matter how bitter the contest. What marks the southern approach is that these fights are handled with courtesy, civility, and gentility. A southern lawyer is respectful of their adversary, employing logic, eloquence, and wit to advance argument in ways that are not personal or antagonistic.
Certainly our region has its drawbacks and negative connotations. Still, there is no group I would rather practice with and against than southern lawyers.
9 Maura Judkis, She Told Trump the Smithsonian Needs Changing (Washington Post Apr. 21, 2025), https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/power/2025/04/21/lindseyhalligan-smithsonian-executive-.order/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhb GciOiJIUzI1NiJ9JyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzQ1MjA4MDAwLCJpc3MiOi JzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzQ2NTkwMzk5LCJpYXQiOjE3NDUyMDgw MDAsImp0aSI6IjZjMTMwMjg2LWZjNGEtNDhmNy05MTk0LTE5MDlkOTJjNmQwNSI sInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9zdHlsZS9wb 3dlci8yMDI1LzA0LzIxL2xpbmRzZXktaGFsbGlnYW4tc21pdGhzb25pYW4tZXhlY3V0 aXZlLW9yZGVyLyJ9.t6Ea73F6qBwR8VGtQT1HJZlfLUMGyoiV5e_wKNauVTI
WELL READ, continued from page 22
PRIVILEGED TO BE IN THE LAW
By: Capt. Brandon R. Proctor United States Marine Corps, Officer Selection Officer
OPERATION ROCKY TOP: PRIVILEGED TO BE SEEKING A FEW GOOD ATTORNEYS
When I arrived in Knoxville as the inaugural Officer Selection Officer for the Marine Corps’ newly established Officer Selection Team, two things were abundantly clear to me. One, my wardrobe severely lacked the sufficient amount of Tennessee Orange required to be accepted as a resident. And, two, finding attorneys to serve as Judge Advocates in the Marine Corps would be one of my highest priorities. As I brainstormed ways to appeal to legal professionals, the initial question that plagued my mind was, “Why would someone practicing law even consider joining the Marine Corps in the first place?” With Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men serving as the extent of my knowledge observing Marine Corps Judge Advocates, when I asked myself if I was prepared to immerse myself in Rocky Top to find attorneys, I constantly heard my conscience replying with a revised line from the movie, “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE ATTORNEYS!” It then occurred to me that the reason anyone practicing law would want to join the Marine Corps as a Judge Advocate is simple, they - like everyone else - want to earn the title of becoming a United States Marine.
During my first couple of months as the Officer Selection Officer, I realized the Marine Corps was not creating enough awareness or providing enough knowledge about the offered Marine Corps’ Law Programs. I would listen to potential applicants explain to me how they had always wanted to serve in the Marine Corps, but how they’d also wanted to pursue law school, not knowing that those pursuits do not have to be mutually exclusive. Judge Advocates are rare in the sense that they derive from one of the few Marine Corps programs where candidates know what line of work they will receive an assignment in prior to earning a commission. Rather than debating their way through the selection process to secure the job they desire, aspiring Judge Advocates raise their right hand already aware of the opportunity that awaits them after receiving their Eagle, Globe, and Anchor.
With my primary job in the Marine Corps being that of an Aviation Supply Officer, while I may not have stepped into the Officer Selection Officer role fully aware of what I was in for in tracking down attorneys, I certainly am aware of how supply and demand works. Right now, and for the foreseeable future - the demand is Judge Advocates - and the Marine Corps supply is low. That means when the Marine Corps states that they need a Judge Advocate, they are not looking for an attorney to join their ranks so they can spend their first tour of duty practicing law with training wheels on. Rather, when the Marine Corps says they need an attorney, it’s because they need a Judge Advocate to perform a wide range of duties ranging from advising a commander on international law and rules of engagement to defending a Marine whose legal rights may have been violated.
I would take the stand under oath and argue that there is no other organization like the United States Marine Corps. We attract individuals
who are seeking to challenge themselves mentally and physically, wanting to serve a cause greater than their own personal endeavors. The path to becoming a Marine is challenging, but facing those challenges with the men and women to your left and right forms unbreakable bonds that serve as a hallmark within the Marine Corps motto “Semper Fidelis, Always Faithful.” As Marines, we pride ourselves on being riflemen/ women first and consider the specific job we are assigned as secondary. If you asked me what my favorite part is about being a Marine Corps Officer, without hesitation I will tell you it is the Marines I have had the pleasure of serving with. In my eyes, the Marines I serve with are not simply coworkers, but rather family. As a Marine Corps Officer, I am invested in my Marines’ lives to the extent that they should feel comfortable enough to approach their leadership seeking advice on any issue. For most issues, we do our best to create solutions for problems at the lowest level. However, sometimes Marines involve themselves in matters that extend beyond their immediate leadership’s sphere of influence, and that is precisely where Judge Advocates come into play. We’re in an organization filled with Marines who have earned the nickname “Devil Dogs,” and Judge Advocates serve as our Matt Murdock-superhero Daredevils.
In my previous unit, I served a brief stint as the adjutant/legal officer, allowing me to access the gift and curse of my command’s pending legal issues. While I may have ended the workday at my previous unit reviewing the pending legal cases asking “Why me?,” in hindsight it allowed me to understand the significance of having Judge Advocates in the Marine Corps. Judge Advocates have the ability to save careers, instill confidence in the service, and bring resolutions to Marines’ lives that already contain enough stressors as is. If the Marine Corps is a family, then Judge Advocates are certainly the cousin you call when you have a problem at 2 a.m., and they show up ready to fight for you before they even have a chance to turn down the Morgan Wallen blasting from the speakers of their sunburnt Silverado.
My mission as the Officer Selection Officer is clear: to fully immerse myself in the Knoxville community and raise awareness about the unique and impactful opportunities within the Marine Corps’ Law Programs, attracting driven individuals to earn the title of United States Marine. The demand for dedicated Judge Advocates is high, and I am committed to forging strong connections within the local legal community to meet this vital need. The Marine Corps is an organization that rewards aggressiveness, initiative, and creative thinkers. Therefore, if you are called to provide representation for a Marine and they happen to look exactly like me, just know that I had to find a way to interview an attorney one way or another. I look forward to establishing the Knoxville Officer Selection Team and cementing it as a staple within the community.
FOODIE FINDS: THE BEST OF KNOXVILLE FOOD TRUCKS
By: Parker Bohne LMU
SOUL PATROL
Most people don’t expect a ruptured appendix to change their entire life, but that’s exactly what happened to Michelle McDuffie, owner of Soul Patrol, a one-of-a-kind lactose-free food truck.
Back in 2007, an emergency appendectomy led to unexpected complications which then led to more procedures for Michelle years later. Those procedures brought with them an unexpected consequence: her body stopped producing lactase—the enzyme that breaks down lactose. Overnight, everyday comfort foods like mac and cheese and banana pudding became off-limits. Even so-called “dairy-free” products didn’t cut it.
Rather than give up, Michelle got creative. She started researching, experimenting in her kitchen, and talking with doctors—all in search of food that tasted good and didn’t leave her feeling awful. Eventually, her recipes started winning over friends and family. That’s when she realized there are millions of people out there who are lactose intolerant just like her, and they also deserve food that doesn’t come with a side of stomach pain.
That journey led to the launch of Soul Patrol—a food truck built for people who thought creamy, comforting, dairy-filled dishes were off the table forever. “I didn’t always see myself owning a food truck,” she admitted. Michelle says she wanted to share her lactose-free creations with others.
Soul Patrol specializes in soul food classics, but the real showstopper is the baked mac and cheese. It’s creamy, flavorful, and completely lactose-free—and it sells out almost every time the truck opens. Other favorites include lactose-free banana pudding and deep-fried “yampanadas.”
Of course, getting Soul Patrol off the ground wasn’t easy. Early on, she was scammed out of a large sum of money by a fake food truck builder. It was a huge loss, financially and emotionally, but with grit and determination, Michelle was able to rebound quickly and continue on her food truck journey. Now, she balances running the truck on weekends while still working a full-time job during the week. “It’s a labor of love,” she said. Michelle has learned valuable lessons in exercising patience, persistence, and understanding through starting her own business.
For Michelle, Soul Patrol is about more than the food. It is about creating a space where people with dietary restrictions don’t have to feel left out. It’s about comfort food that’s inclusive, healing, and made with intention. Soul Patrol is the realization of Michelle’s dream for a safe space for people with dietary restrictions. “Week by week, customer by customer, the vision is becoming a reality,” she said.
Soul Patrol doesn’t have a set location, but you can usually find the truck at Dollar General on Amherst Road in Knoxville or popping up at events around town. The best way to stay updated on locations and menus is through social media—just follow @soulpatrol.lactosefree on Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok.
Whether you’re lactose intolerant or just into really good food, Soul Patrol is worth tracking down. It’s proof that comfort food can still be comforting—without dairy, without discomfort, and without compromise.
Address Changes
Please note the following changes in your KBA Attorneys’ Directory and other office records:
Sarah Magdalen Booher
BPR #: 035051
Tenn. Dept. of Human Services –Administrative Judge Unit 7536 Childress Glenn Ln. Knoxville, TN 37920-9600 Ph: (865) 594-6151 sarah.booher@tn.gov
Steven K. Bowling
BPR #: 012936
The Bowling Law Firm 861 Ebenezer Road Knoxville, TN 37923 Ph: (865) 599-0861 stevenk@skbowlinglaw.com
Kathryn St. Clair Ellis
Family Promise of Knoxville P.O. Box 10184 Knoxville, TN 37939 3545 Middlebrook Pike Knoxville, TN 37921 Ph: (865) 584-2822 kellis@familypromiseknoxville.org
Alexis Taylor Greene
BPR #: 041255
Alexis Greene Law, PLLC 137 E Young High Pike P.O. Box 9057 Knoxville, TN 37940 Ph: (865) 322-0026 alexis@alexisgreenelaw.com
Mark A. Pienkowski BPR #: 035651 Cole, Guindi & Pienkowski 7417 Kingston Pike, Suite 204 Knoxville, TN 37919-5616 Ph: (865) 281-8400 mark@cgpattorneys.com
Andrew J. Roberto BPR #: 026554 Brown and Roberto PLLC 8331 E. Walker Springs Lane, Suite 204 Knoxville, TN 37923 Ph: (865) 691-2777 aroberto@brownandroberto.com
Laura Faye Sadler BPR #: 025265 Knoxville-Knox County Community Action Committee PO Box 51650 Knoxville, TN 37950-1650 Ph: (865) 546-3500 laura.sadler@knoxcac.org
Oak Ridge, TN 37831-7240 Ph: (865) 680-2002 Ashley.Strittmatter@orcc.doe.gov
Becca A. Vigent BPR #: 042165
Veritas-HHS 551 West Main Street Knoxville, TN 37902-2504 Ph: (865) 564-6707 becca.vigent@tn.gov
Joshua R. Walker BPR #: 023073
Tennessee Claims Commission, Eastern Grand Division 7610 Gleason Drive, Suite 201 Knoxville, TN 37919 Ph: (865) 403-1720 josh.walker@tn.gov
Edward Gibson White III BPR #: 026554
Law Offices of Edward G. White III 1400 N. 6th Ave., Suite A2 Knoxville, TN 37917 Ph: (865) 712-0963 trippwhitelaw@gmail.com
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS
THE KNOXVILLE BAR ASSOCIATION IS PLEASED TO WELCOME THE FOLLOWING NEW MEMBERS:
NEW ATTORNEYS
Michael Almaden Sobieski, Messer, & Elledge, PLLC
David D. Ayliffe Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC
Cameron D. Bell Bell Law, PLLC
Kristi Bennett Lewis Thomason, P.C.
Cassandra Buer
McKoon, Williams, Atchley & Stulce PLLC
Catherine A. Cline Siri & Glimstad LLP
Anne Johnson
Butler Sevier Hinsley & Reid PLLC
Bethany L. Collins Tarpy, Cox, Fleishman & Leveille, PLLC
Richard E. Collins Collins Law PLC
Brian S. Faughnan
Faughnan Law, PLLC
Piper A. Givens
Law Office of Timothy P. Coode
Britni N. Holland
Peterson White, LLP
Bradley Krotowski
Law Office of Joshua S. Reed
Susie Lloyd Parker, Poe, Adams, and Bernstein LLP
Angela D. Lowe
Angela Lowe, Attorney At Law
Courtney Matyac Matyac Law LLC
Devon G. Rodgers
Robert Jolley Law
Andrew S. Roskind Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A.
Samuel Robert Rule
Patrick, Beard, Schulman & Jacoway, P.C.
Dennis Joseph Santoni II
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila
Lauren M. Sciezinski Fox, Farley, Willis & Burnette
Katherine Sierra-Kelly Gravis Law
Betsy B. Smith Institutional Compliance Solutions
Ari O. van’t Hoff Quist, Fitzpatrick, & Jarrard PLLC
Allyson Noelle Walz Wettermark Keith
Michael Jeffrey Whitt Knox Defense
David A. York
Butler, Vines, and Babb, PLLC
NEW LAW STUDENT MEMBERS
Ellie Grothe
KBA VOLUNTEERISM
By: Mariel Bough VeraSafe
VOLUNTEERING: A CORNERSTONE OF THE KBA’S LASTING COMMUNITY IMPACT
If you have been a KBA member for any period of time, then you likely already know that there are innumerable opportunities to get involved and give back to the local community through volunteer efforts that have been carried out for years – decades even at this point. Unless you are on KBA staff or are an active member of each individual KBA committee, it is nearly impossible to understand just how widespread the KBA’s reach and impact extend with volunteer initiatives. From my perspective, this collective focus on giving back and serious dedication to continually serving our community is what sets the KBA apart from other bar associations. This is one of the top reasons why I am so proud to be a member of this association.
One of the KBA’s longest-standing programs is the Volunteer Breakfast. This program offers law firms the monthly opportunity to prepare a hot meal for individuals who are working hard to overcome homelessness and attain housing with the help of the Volunteer Ministry Center. The KBA Barristers Volunteer Breakfast Committee’s consistent involvement in this work is only made possible every year because of the generosity of our community partners and the diligence of our volunteers each successive month without fail. Last month was no different, thanks to Kramer Rayson’s support.
Kramer Rayson Values the Knoxville Community
As a staple firm in the local legal community, Kramer Rayson’s commitment to giving back and supporting the people in its immediate vicinity is apparent. When asked to describe why community involvement is so important to Kramer Rayson, the firm made the following statement:
Kramer Rayson is grateful to have been a part of the Knoxville community for over 75 years and appreciates every opportunity to be of service to the community that has given us so much over the years. Whether through “legal” community service, such as pro bono clinics and cases or serving on the KBA Access to Justice committee, or good old-fashioned “non-legal” community service, like serving on nonprofit boards or participating in CAC’s Mobile Meals or the KBA Barrister’s Volunteer Breakfast initiative, Kramer Rayson is proud to support its attorneys and staff as they strive to be good neighbors and dedicated community members. We are incredibly thankful to live in a community where the volunteer spirit runs so strong and look forward to many more years of doing what we can to keep that spirit alive and well.
Kramer Rayson has contributed to the success of the Volunteer Breakfast Committee’s outreach for many years now, and we greatly appreciate this continued support!
The Barristers Volunteer Breakfast Committee Expands Service Opportunities
While the Volunteer Breakfast Committee’s banner initiative has historically been to serve breakfast to those in need at the Volunteer
Ministry Center, we have recently added more programs to our outreach including CareCuts and the Family Table Program provided through Grow Free Tennessee.
CareCuts of Knoxville is a non-profit organization powered entirely by volunteers, providing haircuts, hospitality, and essentials to individuals experiencing homelessness. Volunteers (including hair professionals, salon owners, and support staff) work together to provide not just physical care but also emotional support, helping people move forward from homelessness with dignity. Supporting CareCuts means helping someone feel seen, valued, and supported at critical points in their journey. The organization is currently seeking donations of powdered Gatorade, paper towels, ramen noodles, protein bars, and other essential items. No matter how you choose to support this cause, you are helping rewrite someone’s story one haircut at a time. You can learn more about CareCuts of Knoxville at https://carecutsknox.org.
The Family Table Program provided by Grow Free Tennessee is part of the Community Coalition Against Human Trafficking. This program aims to end human trafficking, raise awareness, offer training, and provide support for survivors. Through this program, volunteers can provide a warm meal to individuals staying at the organization’s safe house. Volunteering with Grow Free Tennessee helps empower those on the path to healing and restoration, supporting survivors as they rebuild their lives. To learn more about these programs, visit https://growfreetn.org.
For both programs, the Barristers Volunteer Breakfast Committee is available to assist with logistics via financial sponsorship, whether shopping for and delivering items needed for CareCuts or preparing and delivering meals for the Family Table Program, offering KBA members the chance to be involved even if the time commitment to prepare or deliver items or meals isn’t feasible.
Arnett Baker Supports Efforts to End Human Trafficking
We are proud to recognize Arnett Baker for its generous contribution in support of Grow Free Tennessee’s ongoing efforts to end human trafficking. Arnett Baker’s financial support reflects a deep commitment to justice, human dignity, and the protection of vulnerable individuals. The firm’s donation will directly fund the Family Table Program’s survivor services, freeing up other Grow Free Tennessee funds to be dedicated to outreach and public awareness campaigns aimed at prevention and recovery. We are grateful for Arnett Baker’s leadership and partnership in this critical cause.
Want to Contribute or Volunteer Your Time?
Volunteering is a powerful way to serve others, and our community benefits when we come together for causes like these. Whether it’s through longstanding initiatives like the Volunteer Ministry Center or new opportunities like CareCuts and Grow Free Tennessee’s Family Table Program, there are many opportunities to make a difference. We encourage you to consider how you can get involved and help make our community stronger. To learn more, please contact the Volunteer Breakfast Committee Co-chairs, Bridget Pyman at bpyman@arnettbaker. com and Miranda Goodwin at mirandagoodwin@gmail.com.
EXPANDING OUR
By: Terry Woods
HORIZONS
LAW SCHOOL 2.0
I graduated from the UT College of Law in December 1978 and immediately realized that I should have paid more attention in class. So, I decided to go back. It took a while, but I returned to law school as a “senior citizen audit student” in Prof. Robert Blitt’s Constitutional Law class. As you might imagine, a lot has changed.
• There’s a new law school, and it has women’s restrooms right next to the men’s! Oh, how I miss the ladies’ room in the basement janitors’ closet of the old law school.
• There are as many female students as male, and men don’t call their female classmates “lawyerettes” anymore.
• The library smells different. That might be because computers are scent-free. Warning: no matter how much you tell yourself that the card catalog must be around here somewhere, it isn’t.
• I never saw a hornbook. We used to get them in the student center bookstore, which doesn’t really exist anymore. You order casebooks online, and finding the designated edition is the Gen Z version of scoring a parking space at Ramsey’s. You can do it, but it will cost you.
• No one writes anything down. They take notes on their laptops. I, in contrast, carried a three-ring binder. I couldn’t find any of the special law-student notebook paper we used in the ’70s but I briefed every case in proper facts-issue-holding-analysis form. Now they use a format called IRAC. I didn’t ask what that means because it’s wrong. Apparently, there is a lucrative market for good class notes, but I couldn’t monetize mine–they were written in the unbreakable cipher of cursive.
• The student-professor relationship no longer rests on a foundation of student humiliation. One day Prof. Blitt noticed that students were frantically typing, so he asked one of them what part of the lecture sparked such enthusiasm. The student said, “I was emailing my mother.” Prof. Blitt laughed. In the olden days, the only time a professor laughed was to ridicule the unprepared. In my day, professors were seven feet tall. They wore black shrouds. Their gaze could turn you to stone. Prof. Blitt brought us doughnuts.
Regardless of how dramatically law school has changed over four decades, that transformation is trivial compared to the metamorphosis of our constitution. With nary an amendment since I first studied it, I learned that today’s constitution gives us a previously undiscovered right to carry a handgun in self-defense;1 but a woman’s right to avail herself of common medical treatment can no longer be found.2 Being a NewDeal, Great-Society, lunatic-fringe liberal, this infuriated me. Surely, I thought, if I undertake a serious study of these decisions, I will discern a principled jurisprudential doctrine guiding the majority. Sadly, I didn’t. And to be completely honest, I didn’t really expect to. I thought Law School 2.0 would just better arm me for Facebook battles. But please don’t blame Prof. Blitt for my recalcitrance; one semester of the Socratic method can’t overcome years of MSNBC.
While I am a willing victim of confirmation bias, my return to law school did change my mind on one thing. I still believe that Supreme Court justices flaunt their own rules, hurl invective at each other, and are downright hypocritical at times, but I now believe that my description applies to all nine justices, not just those appointed by conservative Presidents.
It became alarmingly clear to me that analyzing a SCOTUS opinion requires constantly reminding myself that the justices share one aggravating trait: their humanity. We humans can be loving and indifferent, creative and derivative, conscientious and lazy. We are maddeningly complex.
• Humans can be mean. Consider a recent case in which Justice Sotomayor for the majority took on Justice Kagan in dissent. Justice Sotomayor accused Justice Kagan of being odd and illogical,3 to which Kagan responded, “You’re obsessed with me!”4 I’m paraphrasing.
• Humans can be so sure about how the world works that we think we can predict how it will work. That may be what prompted Justice Stevens to state that Paula Jones’s lawsuit against Bill Clinton “appears to us highly unlikely to occupy any substantial amount” of the President’s time.5
• Humans are sensitive. Even those at the pinnacle of professional success, we can feel threatened by perceived criticism. This may have led Justice Alito to reveal his vulnerable side in his Obergefell v. Hodges6 dissent, fretting, “I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.”7
• Humans are moral. In fact, that’s the core of our humanity. We are so attached to our personal sense of right and wrong that we tend to condemn anyone who deviates from it. Certainly, all justices pledge to set their individual preferences aside and make decisions based only on the dictates of the law: “Our obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code.”8 But it seems they can be skeptical of their colleagues’ objectivity, leading to a nearly 250-years-long quest to concoct a formula for objective adjudication. 9 While past panels spoke of “ordered liberty,” today’s Court seems to use history as a sort of constitutional decoder ring based on the perception that history is neutral.10
• Humans are arrogant. We often look at something commonplace and say, “I could do that. How hard can it be?” You know, things like, say, history. Consider District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court relied on an unassailable historical record to demonstrate that a fundamental right to own a handgun for self-defense is derived from the 17th century’s idiomatic meaning of “bear arms.”11 That really riled up some historians who specialized in the era, prompting them to file an amici brief in a subsequent case to set right the Court’s recitation of history.12 Alas, history can provoke a real “legalistic argle-bargle,” as Justice Scalia might say.13 We get it wrong sometimes. After all, we are all only human, no matter what our role may be in the justice system.
1 District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
2 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., 597 U.S. 215 (2022).
3 Andy Warhol Found. for Visual Arts v. Goldsmith, 143 S. Ct. 2023 (2023) (slip op. at 34).
4 Id. (slip op. at 35 n. 22) (Kagan, J., dissenting).
5 Clinton v. Jones, 520 U. S. 681, 702 (1997)
6 576 U.S. 644 (2015).
7 Id. at 741 (Alito, J., dissenting).
8 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, 850 (1992).
9 See, e.g., Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386 (1798) (Chase, J., id. at 388, and Iredell, J., id. at 399, debating natural law).
10 Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, 706 (2015) (Roberts, C.J., dissenting) (“The purpose of insisting that implied fundamental rights have roots in the history and tradition of our people is to ensure that when unelected judges strike down democratically enacted laws, they do so based on something more than their own beliefs.”).
11 Heller, 554 U. S. at 586.
12 See McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (Breyer, J., dissenting).
13 U.S. v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744, 799 (2013) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
OUTSIDE MY OFFICE WINDOW
By: Sarah M. Booher Tennessee Department of Human Services
GRACEFULLY MOVING ON
Last month, I packed my last box, locked the door, and said goodbye to my perfectly charming house in my adorably quirky neighborhood.
It didn’t start out as the perfect house. Sure, it was brand new and so “me,” but it had a moisture problem in the basement, a broken window seal, and a divided sink that I hated. I worried when I heard a weird sound that it was going to cost me $10,000. Not to mention each night that I laid in my bed that first month, wondering if I had paid too much for it.
But we grew and had fun together. Sometimes the dehumidifier I installed in the crawlspace works. I never fixed the window. I replaced the sink with a huge farmhouse sink, disposal, and motion activated faucet. It’s seen some righteous Sunday brunches over the years, hosted some thrilling Super Bowl parties (complete with 80-inch TV), and every morning I would open the blinds and the rooms would fill with the most glorious natural light.
The lows in that house aren’t worth mentioning. I can almost barely remember them anyway.
Somewhere around Christmas, we realized we needed a change. I say “we” because suddenly the house that was so perfect for me and the Small Sir, a 17-lb doxie mix, was no longer working when we made room for a cheesecake-making, My Morning Jacket-listening, ginger-haired gentleman in our lives. So, I stuck a “For Rent” sign in front of Opal Cottage, and we set our sights on South Knox.
Our very first offer on a house was accepted. It checked maybe every box for us. And thus started a new cycle of worry. What’s that weird smell in the bathroom closet? What’s that random beep happening at random hours? I’ve never bought a house with another person before in my life. What am I doing? Oh, gosh, WHAT AM I DOING??? And whyyyyyyyy is the lighting in this house so heinous?!?! But there’s also incredible wildlife (in just a week’s time, I’d clocked countless bunnies, a hawk, the most incredible lightning bug shows, and a toad whose croak sounds like a bleating sheep), room for guests/weight bench/AND the home office, off-street parking (in the form of a true, two-car garage!), and retiree neighbors who bring homemade fudge to welcome you to the ’hood.
All of this to say, the literal view outside my (work-from-home) office window has changed, and the authorship of Outside My Office Window has changed. Let me warn you now: I am no Robbie Pryor. He gave us seven years of stunning articles, and those are big shoes to fill. My small goal is that I don’t embarrass myself. My big goal is that my contributions to the column strike something in you in much the same ways his did. To that end, I, too, love Jason Isbell songs. I’ve already gotten the tattoo(s). I also love calling Knoxville home. And I’m not afraid of an overshare.
Thus, while Robbie’s last message to us was that love is the only thing that matters, it was a sentence earlier in the article that struck me “I’ve stumbled, struggled, and fallen. I’ve become better at extending grace to myself and others.” Grace. Myself. Others.
In the fall of 2018, I started therapy. Easily one of the greatest decisions I’ve ever made in life. Unlike the properties I’ve purchased, I’ve never once questioned a single dime I’ve spent on it. And for the folks who are so bold as to inquire about therapy and the mysteries of good mental health, the first thing I always say is, “It’s taught me how to show grace to myself and grace to others.” It’s a mantra I play in my head, especially when I’m stressed, or I don’t like myself, or my mother exceeded the question limit of opposing party interrogatories about 36 questions ago. Grace for self. Grace for others. Grace for self. Grace for others.
Grace.
Maybe it wasn’t entirely true when I said the bad stuff wasn’t worth mentioning, and that I hardly remember it anyway. I distinctly remember being holed up alone in that house for 14 long days during Thanksgiving 2021 when I was lucky enough to contract Flu A and COVID simultaneously. I remember my precious neighbor, who shared a spot at the table of the aforementioned epic brunches, dying of a fentanyl overdose. I remember my friend Facetiming me from the OBGYN’s office as she miscarried her child, and a sixmonth feud with one of my best friends where we didn’t speak a word to each other (mostly because of my own stubbornness).
These were big events, and they do warrant mentioning, and they hurt. But what I have learned over the years is that a painful event is not the problem. Bad things happening to us is not the problem. The problem stems from our own refusal to accept a situation for what it is, adapt, and move on. If love is truly all that matters, if that is the ultimate end, how do we get there? Isn’t grace the day-to-day, real-life, how-to-guide for love?
Grace is love, and love is grace.
It’s a tinfoil-covered Chinet plate of turkey and Sister Shubert rolls left for me on the front porch. It’s remembering his life and accepting how he died. It’s sitting on the phone in silence and crying with her. It’s coming to terms with the role I played in not resolving our disagreement earlier. And if we are very lucky--if we really practice grace every single day, at home, in our practices, and out there outside our office windows-it is transformative. It weaves itself into the fabric of our lives and makes the pains bearable. It cohabitates peacefully with the joy and moves us to places we never dreamed of. It gives us space to ask questions without being overwhelmed. And it makes the view so much more incredible. Heinous lighting and all.
