Background Check

Ed Lanquist | Bart Pickett

Born in Crossville, Ed Lanquist lived there until his parents divorced, and he moved with his mother and stepfather to California, South Dakota, and finally Iowa where he graduated from high school. He then moved back to Crossville where he still had family as he was preparing for college. While he originally intended to attend Iowa State, Lanquist changed his mind and ended up at UT Knoxville starting in 1981. While at UT, he majored in civil engineering. Lanquist remembers his stepfather, a lawyer, telling him that since he was good at math that he should get an engineering degree so that patent law would be an option for him if he chose to go to law school.

Following college graduation in 1985, Lanquist did decide to continue on to law school. Since he was already in Knoxville and enjoyed his time there, he started at UT Law. During his second summer in law school, Lanquist worked for a patent firm in Knoxville. He liked the work and intellectual property law made sense to him. By the time graduation rolled around in 1988, Lanquist was ready to move on.

After interviewing with firms all over, he landed a job with Manier Herod in Nashville. When he started there, he initially did construction law, but one of the firm’s attorneys, Mark Patterson, wanted to develop an intellectual property practice group. Lanquist quickly joined him in doing IP work in addition to construction work. Lanquist took and passed the patent bar in 1989. By that time, IP work consumed Lanquist’s entire practice.

By 1992, Patterson and Lanquist realized they were not getting any IP work referrals from other firms. They decided to branch off and start their own firm in hopes of getting said referrals. At that time, the new firm, Waddey Patterson, began. The strictly IP law firm continued to grow from 3 lawyers to the 16 lawyers they have now. After Waddey’s departure in 2014, the firm became its current iteration of Patterson Intellectual Property Law P.C.

One of the principles at Patterson guided by Lanquist’s philosophy is that the practice of law is so good to them that they must give back to the community. As a result, all of Patterson’s lawyers take active roles in nonprofits and volunteering. Lanquist certainly leads by example. He has served on approximately 50 nonprofits during his time in Nashville. He currently serves as the board chair for Hands on Nashville and on the board of New Dialect, a contemporary dance practice. Lanquist focuses on local nonprofits whose mission he believes in as well as organizations that have the potential to grow. He believes in serving on a board but then rotating off within 4-6 years to prevent burnout and to allow new members.

In addition to nonprofits, Lanquist’s other passion is whiskey. With around 2,000 bottles, he believes he has one of the largest private collections of whiskey in Nashville. A caterer once told Lanquist that he has more whiskey than Brad Paisley. This love for whiskey has even led to a recurring NBA CLE taught by Lanquist that goes on the bourbon or the whiskey trail.

In addition to being active on the CLE committee, Lanquist has long been involved in the NBA. He served as president in 2014 at a time when he was also the managing partner at his firm and co-chair of Leadership Nashville. His crowning achievement during his term as president was the hiring of Monica Mackie as executive director, a position she still holds. Lanquist also serves as a Trustee on the Nashville Bar Foundation Board. Most recently, Lanquist has been elected as Vice-President for the TBA, a position that will lead to him being President in 2024-25.

Lanquist lives in the Regency Park neighborhood in Nashville. He has two adult children. His daughter, Lindsey, lives in East Nashville and works as a freelance writer for digital content. His son, Ash, lives in Maryland and works for an education tech company. n

BART PICKETT is an attorney at the Law Offices of Julie Bhattacharya Peak where he represents Liberty Mutual Group, Inc.’s insureds and customers of its affiliated groups in litigation throughout Middle Tennessee.

tions.16 This state-based standard must be met every 10 years because Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution requires district lines to be redrawn every 10 years after a U.S. census is taken.17

When drawing the districts, the state legislature must consider the following criteria: (1) contiguity (i.e., the principle that all areas within a district should be physically adjacent) and (2) the preservation of political subdivisions (i.e., the limits of counties, cities, and towns).18 And, of course, that the districts are substantially equal in population in accordance with constitutional requirements for “one person one vote.”

While federal law stipulates that districts have nearly equal populations and not discriminate based on race or ethnicity,19 the reality is that the political party that holds the most seats in the legislature naturally draws the boundaries in a way that will aid that party in its quest to retain control of the state legislature.20 This form of re-districting, also popularly referred to as “gerrymandering,” comes in two forms: “cracking” and “packing.”21 “Cracking” means dividing a party’s supporters among multiple districts so that they fall short of a majority in each one.22 “Packing” means concentrating one party’s backers in a few districts so that the party wins by overwhelming margins.23

Tennessee’s Re-Districting of Davidson County

In January 2022, the Tennessee House passed House Bill 1035, in which the state House map was amended to adjust six districts, unpairing incumbents in two districts.24 The companion bill in the Senate—Senate Bill 779—was approved with a 26-5 vote.25 And, on February 6, 2022, Governor Bill Lee signed the bills into law.

Pursuant to T.C.A. § 20-18-101, the Tennessee Supreme Court appointed a three-judge panel to hear the recent redistricting issues in April 2022.26 The Tennessee Supreme Court picked two judges, Circuit Court Judge Michael Sharp from East Tennessee and West Tennessee Chancellor Steven Maroney, to accompany Davidson County Chancellor Russel Perkins. The purpose of this appointment was to ensure that all three Grand Divisions of Tennessee were represented.27 The panel issued an injunction and ordered the Senate to submit a new map to address the numbering issue within 15 days, or the panel would submit its version for use. Not long thereafter, on April 13, 2022, the Tennessee Supreme Court overturned the temporary injunction blocking a new Senate map, allowing the state to proceed with senatorial elections under districts drawn in Public Chapter Number 598.

What’s Next?

To date, Democrats have criticized the re-districting as unconstitutional, asserting that it divides the counties more than necessary in the House map.28 Regardless of whether or not the Democrats’ criticism is valid, Tennessee is expected to proceed with its elections in November 2022. While it remains to be seen who will be seated in the newly defined districts, it is without question that one party will likely gain seats in the state legislature—while others are squeezed out of office due to change in the districts’ demographics. n

LAUREN D. ROTA is an Assistant Attorney General with the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Tennessee. Lauren litigates various tortious claims on behalf of state agencies, departments, and employees.

Endnotes

1 Jon Styf, Tennessee House Passes Redistricting Maps, The WashingTon examiner (January 25, 2022). 2 Yue Stella Yu, House Redistricting to Eliminate Five Democratic Incumbents in Urban Tennessee, The Tennesseean (Dec. 17, 2021). 3 Id. 4 Redistricting in Tennessee, Ballotpedia. 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 Tenn. ConsT. Art II, § 4. 8 Mary Darby, Redistricting 2021-2022 Process Updates, LegisLaTive UpdaTes (Oct. 22, 2021). 9 Id. 10 Id. 11 Id. 12 Id. 13 Redistricting in Tennessee, Ballotpedia. 14 Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 561–62, 84 S. Ct. 1362, 1381, 12 L. Ed. 2d 506 (1964). 15 Id. 16 Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 188–89, 82 S. Ct. 691, 694–95, 7 L. Ed. 2d 663 (1962). 17 Tenn. ConsT. Art II, § 4. See also Jon Styf, Tennessee House Passes Redistricting Maps, The Washington Examiner (January 25, 2022). 18 Redistricting Systems: A 50-State Overview, National Conference of State Legislatures, (March 29, 2021). 19 Redistricting in Tennessee, Ballotpedia. 20 Gill v. Whitford, 138 S. Ct. 1916, 1919 (2018). 21 Id. 22 Id. 23 Id. at 1924. 24 Tennessee House Passes Redistricting Maps, Jon Styf, The Washington Examiner, The Center Square, January 25, 2022. 25 Redistricting Systems: A 50-State Overview, National Conference of State Legislatures (March 29, 2021). 26 Tenn. Code ann. § 20-18-101; See also Melissa Brown, Tennessee Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court Order Blocking State’s New Senate Map, The Tennesseean (April 13, 2022). 27 Melissa Brown, Tennessee Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court Order Blocking State’s New Senate Map, The Tennesseean (Apr. 13, 2022). 28 Id.