AVVO Top Attorney
BBB
Justia Lawyer Rating
Attorneys For Justice
Martindale-Hubbell
SuperLawyers
SuperLawyers
AVVO
AVVO
AVVO
Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association

Articles Tagged with Attorney Paul Tennison

Military Law Attorney Paul Tennison

Attorney Paul Tennison accepting command of Battery B in Poland on August 15, 2019

A military discharge upgrade can be an important step in the life of a veteran who believes that he or she received a lower discharge than what was deserved. Various federal and state benefits are available only to veterans who were discharged at an acceptable level. The best discharge is an Honorable discharge, which should enable the veteran to access all benefits. General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions is the second highest level. Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge is the third level, while a Bad Conduct Discharge is the fourth. Dishonorable is the lowest level of discharge and is reserved for those convicted of serious crimes while in the military. Veterans who receive a Dishonorable Discharge forfeit all benefits, cannot lawfully possess a firearm, and forfeit their right to vote. For more information about types of military discharges, you should refer to this article.1

Fortunately, U.S. federal law allows veterans to request a higher-level discharge through one of two record-correction boards. Within 15 years of discharge, veterans may apply to a Discharge Review Board (DRB) using form DD-293. Importantly, DRBs may not make a discharge worse nor can they overturn a court-martial decision. If a discharge occurred more than 15 years ago, a veteran can apply to the Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR). Veterans should apply to the BCMR within 3 years of discovering the error or injustice they are asking the board to fix using form DD-149. BCMRs also cannot make a discharge worse or override a court-martial conviction.

Military Law Attorney Paul E. Tennison

Military Law Attorney Paul Tennison

You may have heard about Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (“UCMJ”). Servicemembers experienced in the realm of military justice may reference Article 15 punishment under numerous terms: punishment by the commander, non-judicial punishment (“NJP”), getting ninja punched, captain’s mast, or admiral’s mast. Essentially an Article 15 proceeding is where a commanding officer determines if a military member has committed a relatively minor infraction of the rules governing military servicemembers. In my Army service I have witnessed Article 15s for many different circumstances, including soldiers being repeatedly late to formation, a soldier being absent without leave (“AWOL”) for a short period of time, a soldier reporting drunk to duty, a soldier involved in a bar fight, a soldier that got a DUI, a soldier breaking curfew, insubordination, and a soldier falling asleep while on guard duty. More serious crimes under the UCMJ will go straight to a court-martial and not be adjudicated under Article 15. Article 15 proceedings are much more common than courts-martial.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice is the law that applies to U.S. military servicemembers.¹ This includes all branches of the uniformed services in the United States: Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and the Coast Guard. However, the UCMJ does not apply in all circumstances. For example, National Guard and Air Guard Soldiers are only subject to the UCMJ when activated in a federal capacity. Military reserve components, servicemembers, and service academy cadets are governed by the UCMJ. ROTC cadets are exempted from the UCMJ even while on active duty for training.²

NATO's Enhanced Forward Prensence

For those of you who have read Paul’s blogs, worked with him on a case, or wish to retain him as your counsel regarding a military law matter, you may have noticed that he has recently been absent from the office. As noted in his attorney profile on our website, Paul attended the United States Military Academy at West Point and subsequently gained extensive military experience that included challenging training exercises overseas in Korea and Germany. He then received his Juris Doctor from Vanderbilt Law while continuing to serve our country as an officer in the Tennessee Army National Guard. Upon passing the Tennessee Bar, Paul joined Cole Law Group as an associate attorney and pursued his passion to build a military law practice to serve military members as well as veterans.

This summer Paul was called up for active duty by the U.S. Army and deployed to Bemowo Piskie, Poland, where he is currently in command of 105 soldiers in support of NATO’s Enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) Battle Group Poland. The eFP provides a responsive and flexible military capability to respond to any aggressive act as part of NATO’s overall deterrence and defensive posture. 

Battle Group Poland is a multinational battle group, comprised of U.S., U.K., Croatian and Romanian soldiers that will serve alongside the host nation’s 15th Mechanized Brigade as a defense and deterrence force.

https://www.colelawgrouppc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Screen-Shot-2019-06-03-at-4.54.31-PM-1-300x183.png

Attorney Paul Tennison Active Duty

The Physical Disability Review Board was created by federal law with the passage of the Dignified Treatment of Wounded Warriors Act in 2008. The DTWWA made several significant changes to the care of wounded veterans. First, the law required the military branches to use the same disability determination rating scale as that used by the VA. Second, the law expanded the care available to injured service members after their military service. This included changes in treatment in military and civilian facilities for a variety of conditions, including Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Third, the new law required comprehensive plans to address TBI and PTSD. Fourth, the law directed the Secretary of the Department of Defense (DoD) to establish physical disability review boards to review disability determinations meeting certain criteria and timeline requirements. The law also addressed the quality of housing provided to patients by requiring improved standards.1

After the law passed, the DoD issued instruction 6040.44 which “establish[ed] policies, assign[ed] responsibilities, and provide[d] procedures for PDBR operation and management as required by section 1554a of Title 10, United States Code.”2 The PDBR’s mandate is to: “reassess the accuracy and fairness of the combined disability ratings assigned former service members” who meet certain criteria.3 Those criteria are summarized here:

Contact Information