Every once in a while, we’ll see an appellate decision that serves as a commercial law primer – reminding business litigators and transactional attorneys of basic legal principles that sometimes are not precisely recalled...more
Most of us, even old-timers, changed the way we practiced law when the Coronavirus pandemic hit. We stopped going to the office (as much), we worked remotely (a lot), and we video-conferenced a whole bunch (before March 13,...more
4/2/2021
/ American Bar Association (ABA) ,
Client Communication ,
Due Diligence ,
Duty of Confidentiality ,
Law Practice Management ,
Legal Ethics ,
Legal Opinion ,
Remote Proceedings ,
Remote Working ,
Rules of Professional Conduct ,
Supervision ,
Technical Standards ,
Virtual Meetings
The Pagliara divorce has given us much to talk about. In “Sex, Lies, (Drugs) and Videotape … and Malicious Prosecution”, we discussed the dismissal of Husband’s malicious prosecution claims against Wife’s former divorce...more
Previously, I have written about appellate decisions considering the issues presented by pro se litigants and their non-compliance with applicable trial and appellate court rules. (See July 9, 2018 blog and September 18, 2018...more
The 1989 movie, “Sex, Lies, and Videotape,” starring James Spader and Andie MacDowell, and directed by Steven Soderbergh, told the story of a young couple, a junior partner at a law firm and his housewife spouse; the idyllic...more
5/8/2020
The law in Tennessee on “piercing the corporate veil” has not substantially changed since our last blog on the subject.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals has recently, and cogently, restated and reconfirmed the state law...more
As lawyers, we learn early on about the necessity that a court must have personal jurisdiction over a defendant in order to enter a valid, enforceable judgment. Recently, the Tennessee Court of Appeals, in Corporate Flight...more
In Dialysis Clinic, Inc. v. Kevin Medley, 567 S.W.3d 314 (TN 2019), the Tennessee Supreme Court decided as a matter of first impression that attorney communications with a third party for the purpose of providing legal advice...more
Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 13(a) provides that “any question of law may be brought up for review and relief by any party.” Well, not always.
In Melo Enterprises, LLC, et al. v. D1 Sports Holdings, LLC, Case No....more
The Tennessee Court of Appeals, in Little Hurricane Properties, LLC v. Ralph Cafaro, Jr., et al., Case No. E2017-01781-COA-R3-CV, outlined, again on August 22, 2018, the risks assumed by a DIY litigant. The court found the...more
Old dogs can learn new tricks and maturing lawyers can learn something new in the law.
In Koczera v. Steele, Case No. E2017-02056-COA-R3-CV, on August 20, 2018, the Tennessee Court of Appeals held that litigants...more
Question: Can a 50% shareholder pierce her own corporation’s veil to impose liability upon the only other shareholder for an unsatisfied judgment in her favor against their corporation?
Answer: Yes.
The Tennessee Court...more
We’ve all been there – representing a client against someone who has never heard, or doesn’t believe, that “A lawyer that represents himself, has a fool for a client.” Either because of lack of resources, knowledge, interest,...more
Who has not been injured in a recreational, athletic activity? Who has not accidentally injured someone else in the course of play? We all have … an errant softball throw, a shanked iron, a bouncing horseshoe. We enjoy the...more
The Tennessee Supreme Court has now determined that money withdrawn from a joint checking account and placed into a certificate of deposit in the name of only one of the spouses loses its status as entireties property. In re...more
On May 23, 2017, in Nissan North America, Inc. v. Tustin Import Auto Sales, LLC, et al., No. 16-117-BC, the Tennessee Business Court found that the only remaining defendant, Raymond Enriquez, had defrauded the plaintiff and...more
The Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section: SK Food Corporation, et al. v. FirstBank, Case No. M2016-01019-COA-R3-CV, filed 02/28/2017, recently had the opportunity to consider whether a party, faced with a “take it or...more
The Tennessee Business Court, in For Senior Help, LLC v. Medex Patient Transport, LLC, Case No. 16-0553-BC, decided January 5, 2017, stayed litigation and compelled arbitration of the disputes arising under the parties’...more
The Tennessee Business Court, now in Phase II of the Pilot Project continues to deal with interesting and contemporary issues. In Universal Strategy Group v. Halstead, Case No. 16-15-BC, Chancellor Lyle held, after a bench...more
The Tennessee Supreme Court recently ruled that “a joint tenancy with an express right of survivorship can be severed by the unilateral actions of one of the co-tenants.” Darryl F. Bryant, Sr. v. Darryl F. Bryant, Jr., No....more
In a lengthy, but detailed, opinion, The Tennessee Business Court, now in Phase II of the Pilot Project, has provided substantial guidance to practitioners concerning objections to the subject matter jurisdiction of the Court...more
The Tennessee Court of Appeals refused to let a litigant weasel out of a negotiated and binding agreement to settle disputed claims. Tim Grace v. Jeanna Grace d/b/a Grace Trucking, Case No. W2016-00650-COA-Re-CV (11/29/16)....more
In a recent, well-written opinion, the Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section, WM Capital Partners, LLC v. Thornton, No. M2015-00328-COA-R3-CV, filed January 17, 2017, determined that a secured creditor’s duty to dispose...more
The Tennessee Court of Appeals, in Anderson v. Poltorak, No. M2015-02523-COA-R3-CV, filed December 29, 2016, has held that, although the plaintiff’s three (3) convictions for child pornography strictly qualified under Rule...more
The Tennessee Business Court found occasion to deal with personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens issues through its recent written opinion in Nissan North America, Inc. v. Tustin Import Auto Sales, LLC, et al, Case No....more