Nashville, Tenn. – On November 5, 2025, the Tennessee Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for its November docket in Jackson, Tennessee. Oral arguments will be heard at the Tennessee Supreme Court building in Jackson and livestreamed to the TNCourts YouTube page (https://www.youtube.com/@TNCourts).
Beginning at 1:30 pm CST, the Court will hear the following two cases:
• Jamesway Construction, Inc. v. David W. Salyers, P.E. – This case began when the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (“TDEC”) issued an administrative order finding multiple violations of the Water Quality Control Act (“Water Act”) stemming from the placement of fill material across several acres of property that allegedly contained wetlands. Jamesway Construction (“Jamesway”) challenged TDEC’s decision. After a hearing, an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) found that TDEC had not proved certain violations. TDEC appealed twenty-five days later. Jamesway moved to dismiss this appeal as untimely, arguing that the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (“UAPA”) imposed a fifteen-day deadline. An ALJ denied Jamesway’s motion, finding that the Water Act provided a thirty-day window to appeal. Without waiting for the merits of TDEC’s appeal to be decided, Jamesway appealed from the ALJ’s procedural ruling to the Davidson County Chancery Court. The Chancery Court reversed the ALJ and dismissed TDEC’s appeal, concluding that the UAPA controlled. TDEC then appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the Chancery Court in a divided ruling. Judge Jeffrey Usman disagreed with the majority and concluded that the Water Act controlled. The Tennessee Supreme Court granted TDEC’s application for permission to appeal to consider whether Jamesway properly appealed the ALJ’s procedural ruling about the timeliness of TDEC’s original appeal to the Chancery Court before that original appeal was fully resolved and, if so, whether the UAPA or the Water Act controls the deadline for TDEC’s original appeal.
• State v. James R. Holley – A police officer stopped the defendant, convicted felon James R. Holley, for speeding. A search of the vehicle yielded marijuana, drug paraphernalia, and a firearm. The defendant pleaded guilty to speeding, certain drug offenses, and unlawful possession of a firearm. The defendant reached an agreement with the State that he would serve an effective term of nine years for his offenses, but the agreement left the manner of service to the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied any form of alternative sentencing and instead ordered the defendant to serve his term in prison. The defendant appealed. The Court of Criminal Appeals noted questions about whether the judgments entered by the trial court conformed with sentencing law. The court also noted that the record on appeal did not include a transcript of the guilty plea hearing to help resolve those questions. Thus, the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the appeal, concluding that the record was inadequate for conducting review. The Tennessee Supreme Court granted the defendant’s application for permission to appeal to consider whether the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly dismissed the appeal and whether statutory enhancement factors may be used in determining the manner of service of a sentence.
In addition, a third case will be submitted to the Court on briefs:
• Fred C. Dance v. Board of Professional Responsibility – This case is an attorney discipline action. Licensed attorney Fred C. Dance obtained a settlement on behalf of a client in a civil matter. Mr. Dance deposited the settlement funds into his professional trust account. However, instead of remitting the funds to the client, Mr. Dance used them to pay personal debts. Mr. Dance then stopped communicating with the client for approximately four years. After the client filed a complaint with the Board of Professional Responsibility (“the Board”), Mr. Dance reached out to the client. Mr. Dance agreed to accept a lesser fee than originally agreed to and paid the client the funds due. In adjudicating the complaint, a hearing panel of the Board found that Mr. Dance had violated multiple rules of professional conduct and disbarred him. Mr. Dance appealed to the Williamson County Circuit Court, which upheld the hearing panel’s decision. Mr. Dance now appeals to the Tennessee Supreme Court, arguing that the hearing panel’s sanction was too harsh.
Media interested in attending oral arguments should file a request with samantha.fisher@tncourts.gov.