Charges Possible for Parents of Underage Drinkers

by

It’s pretty common knowledge that it’s against the law to purchase beer for minors, but that’s not the only way to get charged with “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” when it comes to alcohol.

alcoholic beverage

© jc / PhotoXpress

The reality is that you can receive that same “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” charge for allowing someone under 21 to consume alcohol on your property. According to the statute TCA 39-15-404(A)(3)(B), “It is an offense for any owner, occupant or other person having a lawful right to the exclusive use and enjoyment of property to knowingly allow a person to consume alcoholic beverages, wine or beer on the property; provided that the owner, occupant or other person knows that, at the time of the offense, the person consuming is an underage adult.”

In March, a Brentwood couple was charged with several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor when police arrived at their house to find beer cans all over the yard and kids as young as 14 consuming alcohol on the property. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Recovering Costs Not Always an Easy Case to Make

by

The Tennessee Court of Appeals recently upheld the Davidson County Chancellor Carol McCoy’s ruling that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs associated with filing a lawsuit to obtain public records from the Metro-Nashville Police Department (MNPD).

In Custis v. Metro. Nashville Police Department, the plaintiff (through her attorney) had submitted an open records request on December 2, 2010, and after a few months of additional communication (but no documents), filed a Petition on March 17, 2011 in an attempt to obtain the documents. The documents were ultimately produced on April 25, 2011. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Top 3 Most Common Questions About Divorce

by

When it comes to divorce, there can be a lot of questions. Finding the answers to these questions shouldn’t be difficult, but once you start researching, you end up with thousands of resources that offer differing, vague, and often incorrect information on the process of divorce.

For this reason, we receive calls on an almost daily basis from people wanting to better understand what a divorce looks like, how much it costs, and what it will take from them and their family.

We want to contribute to the conversation and shed some light on some of the most frequent divorce-related questions we hear:

1. What is the difference between a contested and an uncontested divorce?

In an uncontested divorce, both parties agree on all matters and sign a marital dissolution agreement to be approved by the court. Essentially, the decision (and every element of it) is mutual. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

New Law Allows Certain Criminal Records to Be Erased

by

If you have been convicted of a crime in the past you may be eligible to have this conviction expunged (or cleared) from your record under a recent law passed by the Tennessee General Assembly. Having your public criminal record cleared may make it easier to find employment and may restore your right to carry a firearm, among other benefits.

The new law allows for expungement of many, but not all, misdemeanor crimes, as well as some low-grade felony offenses. A person seeking expungement must file a petition in the court of the county where he or she was convicted and may not have any criminal convictions other than the one for which he or she is seeking expungement. Also, five years must have passed since the completion of the sentence and all costs and restitution must be paid.

If you think you may be eligible for an expungement, please call our office for a consultation and case review.

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Does Your Facebook Page Live On After You Die? Planning for Your ‘Digital Estate’

by

Many people choose to plan for their eventual passing by executing an estate plan through a will or living trust.  Whether you have made such arrangements or not, it is important that you consider what to do with your “digital estate” upon your passing.  It is no longer a matter of simply choosing who gets the house, the car(s), the bank account(s), and your pets.

Facebook logo via Wikimedia Commons

By Facebook [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Every day, we acquire more intangible assets.  Who, if anybody, do you want to inherit your family pictures or your collection of electronic books, movies, and music?  Do you want someone to continue your blog?  Do you want your heirs to be able to access your email and or Facebook accounts?  Do you have private correspondence on your computer that you do not wish anyone to read or wish that only a certain person or persons read?  Where do you have all your passwords written down?  These and similar questions are only going to become more important as people continue to rely more and more upon iPhones, iPads, and computers to conduct business, keep organized, socialize, and maintain family relationships.  Wills and trust instruments are very versatile and customizable documents and the questions above may be answered by including specific provisions to address them. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Termination of Chattanooga Police Officer Diagnosed with PTSD sent back to City Council

by

The underlying issue in this case is whether a police officer that had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of his military service in Iraq could be terminated as being unfit for duty. Procedurally, this case raises several issues related to the complexity of employment decisions by municipalities, particularly police offices, in Tennessee. Officer Hoback was terminated by the police chief and this decision was upheld by a panel of three Chattanooga City Council members based upon standards set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated 38-8-106 and set by the Tennessee Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission. In addition to these provisions, the Chattanooga City Charter also dictated the standard of review by the trial and appellate courts. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Contract Upheld Despite Murder Conviction; ‘Slayer Rule’ Not Invoked

by

Teresa Larkin died in 2003 with $703,000 in life insurance proceeds payable to her husband, Dale. The decedent’s daughter (Husband’s stepdaughter) sued Dale Larkin, alleging that he killed her mother and that, under the “Slayer Rule“, which prevents a person from taking property at the death of someone he or she intentionally kills, he was not legally entitled to any of the insurance proceeds. The parties settled this initial case in 2006, with the daughter receiving $500,000 in insurance proceeds, $180,000 of which went for her attorneys’ fees.

The police investigation into Teresa Larkin’s death continued and Dale Larkin was charged and later convicted of the first degree murder. Daughter sued Dale Larkin, asking the Court to set aside the prior settlement agreement on the basis that she was fraudulently induced to enter into the agreement by Mr. Larkin’s assertions of innocence. The trial court dismissed Daughter’s Complaint and the Court of Appeals affirmed. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Defunct Carthage Corporation Held in Contempt

by

The Tennessee Court of Appeals rules that a corporation may not avoid a finding of contempt or circumvent an injunction by leasing property to a third party.  The trial court had found that a Carthage business was in violation of the county zoning ordinance and had enjoined the continued use of the property as a trucking terminal and ordered the removal of junk from the property. The property owner attempted to avoid the court’s order by dissolving the corporation and leasing the property to an individual who essentially continued the same operation.

In its ruling the court stated, “Carver Trucking invites this Court to participate in a game of sorts, the object of which is to continue the enjoined activities without being in technical violation of the injunction. We decline to do so.”  Smith County Planning Commission v. Carver Trucking, Inc.

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Memphis Firm Pietrangelo Cook Wins Benchmark Residential Construction Dispute

by

A Memphis-area arbitration panel awarded residential homebuilder David Clark Construction contract damages and attorney fees Wednesday in a dispute closely-watched by the regional construction industry. Clark is the immediate past president of the Memphis Area Home Builders Association.

Pietrangelo Cook Attorneys

Pietrangelo Cook Attorneys

In its binding opinion, the panel determined that the homeowners had breached the construction contract by changing the standards of construction and evicting Clark’s team from the project mid-stream.

Because binding arbitration provisions are so common in construction contracts, the decision will likely resonate across the home construction industry in its protection of the rights of homebuilders in disputes with owners.

The homeowners, in this case, contracted with Clark to build them a $600,000 home in the exclusive “Enclave” subdivision in Germantown, Tennessee.  After Clark had completed 80% of the work, the homeowners ceased payment, arguing that Clark had breached the construction contract because his work varied in small ways from the home designer’s original plan.  They then hired a new builder to finish the job at a substantially increased cost using building methods not customary for residential construction in the area, and sought to hold Clark liable for the balance.

Pietrangelo Cook attorneys Tim Johnson, Bryan Smith and Darrell Phillips vigorously defended the contract, arguing that Clark retained some discretion under its terms to vary from the plans, and that the homeowners had themselves breached, by changing the standards of construction in the middle of the game. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone

Day-of Wedding Prenup Upheld by Court of Appeals

by

A prenuptial agreement executed immediately before marriage was determined to be enforceable against a widow claiming a share of her deceased husband’s estate. The trial court found that the widow entered into the agreement “freely, knowledgeably, and in good faith” even though she testified that she only saw a part of the document and that the decedent (husband) told her that it would apply only in the event of their divorce. The widow admitted that she did not seek independent legal advice.
In re Estate of Carl Robin Geary, Sr. No. M2011-01705-COA-R3-CV, February 28, 2012.

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Reddit Plusone