NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WTVF) — Davidson County Chancellor I'Ashea L. Myles granted a last-minute motion to stay Solaren Risk Management's 30-day suspension, ordering the company to pay a $118,000 bond as a new hearing takes shape over guards posing as police.
Solaren CEO Jack Byrd filed motions Tuesday morning to halt his company's suspension and requested a judicial review of an order filed last week by the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance (TDCI).
According to Solaren's filing, "The egregious suspension penalty without notice has produced immediate and accrued losses of business contracts of over $30 million in just 3 days putting over 372 people out of their jobs, with hundreds more at risk."
Myles' stay suspended the latest order but does not overturn its findings. The next hearing is set for June 1, when the court will decide whether the suspension should remain in place pending a final hearing. The State Attorney General's office will now represent TDCI in court.
Byrd told NewsChannel 5 Investigates he looks forward to having an impartial court review his appeal, where he expects multiple people will testify on either side:
"Today's decision is a reaffirmation from the very beginning: fairness, due process and the rule of law still matter. Solaren has full faith in the merits of our position and in the impartial tier of fact now reviewing this matter. The administrative findings at issue were not only inequitable, but grossly contradictory in both reasoning and application. The necessity of intervention by the Chancery Court speaks for itself. Courts do not lightly enjoin the actions of the State, and today's ruling reflects the seriousness of the concerns raised. We remain confident that, when examined under the scrutiny of a neutral court and a complete record, the merits will prevail."
Last week's order was in response to an appeal filed by Solaren challenging a 2025 order by Administrative Law Judge Claudia Padfield, who ordered Solaren to pay a $64,000 fine for violating 32 out of 62 civil penalties related to security guards wearing patches unlawfully identifying themselves as police.
The case comes after years of scrutiny from state law enforcement officials with the Peace Officer Standards & Training Commission (POST), where frustration grew over what some considered a lack of transparency or, at worst, criminal impersonation.
Byrd has defended his stance that if the guards he employs have law enforcement credentials from somewhere in the state, the law allows them to wear law enforcement patches while working private security in a different jurisdiction.
Officials with POST say the law is clear: Only full-time POST-certified law enforcement can identify themselves as law enforcement outside their jurisdiction. They said deviating from or ignoring the law presents a risk to the general public, who may turn to someone in an emergency only to find they cannot help.
Byrd appealed the latest order to the chancery courts, but says this was only after he was forced to also appeal to the very department that accused him of wrongdoing. TDCI increased Solaren's fine to $118,000 and added a 30-day suspension after claiming Padfield erred in part in her initial order. TDCI adopted some of Padfield's findings and overturned others.
The order found that Padfield was mistaken in dismissing counts related to Solaren deploying 10 individuals as security guards wearing "police" or law enforcement-identifying uniforms. The order also confirmed that at least 3 individuals were deployed as security guards who were not registered with the state's Private Protective Services program, as required by law.
Several former Solaren security guards expressed regret for wearing law enforcement patches while working security jobs, knowing they had no affiliation with any local law enforcement agency. Some had never completed training to serve as law enforcement but said they were pressured into wearing certain patches because it gave the company more credibility when seeking new clients.
