Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-729 (2026)

Trial de novo on appeal - Decision on merits

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No civil case, originating in a general sessions court and carried to a higher court, shall be dismissed by such court for any informality whatever, but shall be tried on its merits; and the court shall allow all amendments in the form of action, the parties thereto, or the statement of the cause of action, necessary to reach the merits, upon such terms as may be deemed just and proper. The trial shall be de novo, including damages.

Code 1858, § 4177 (deriv. Acts 1851-1852, ch. 100, § 2); Shan., § 5989; mod. Code 1932, § 10190; impl. am. Acts 1979, ch. 68, §§ 2, 3; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 19-425; Acts 1993, ch. 241, § 46; T.C.A., § 19-1-118; Acts 1995, ch. 418, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: Ware v. Meharry Med. Coll., 898 S.W.2d 181 (Tenn. 1995).
Ware v. Meharry Med. Coll., 898 S.W.2d 181 (Tenn. 1995). · cites it 10× “Accordingly, Tenn.Code Ann. § 16-15-729 (Supp.1993) provides that circuit courts should not dismiss cases originating in general sessions courts because of “any informality whatever.”
McGee v. Jacobs, 236 S.W.3d 162 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 13× “Analysis This lawsuit requires us to determine whether, under Tennessee Code Annotated § 28-1-105, an action initially adjudicated by the general session court, appealed to the circuit court for de novo review pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 16-15-729, voluntarily…”
B & G Constr., Inc. v. Polk, 37 S.W.3d 462 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “[Cjases appealed from the general sessions court to the circuit court pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 16-15-729 should be treated for all purposes as if they originated in the circuit court.”
Sheila Brown v. Rico Roland, 357 S.W.3d 614 (Tenn. 2012). · cites it 2× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 16-15-729 (2009). Accordingly, for proceedings originating in general sessions courts, “[t]he circuit courts have thus permitted amendments that add new parties, that add new causes of action, that add a new counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or…”
Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Gilbert, 656 F. App'x 45 (6th Cir. 2016). “2014); Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-729 . It says only that “[a]n appeal bond .”
Crowley v. Thomas, 343 S.W.3d 32 (Tenn. 2011). “§ 16-15-729 (2009). Ms. Thomas, however, could dismiss the appeal without the consent and over the objection of Mr.”
Best Signs, Inc. v. Bobby King, 358 S.W.3d 226 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “Best Signs appeals and raises one issue for review as stated in its brief: Whether the trial court erred in its determination as to the rightful owner of the 1997 International truck and crane at issue.”
S. Auto Source Fin., LLC v. Airways Towing & Recovery, LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 21× “[Appellee] argues that T.C.A. § 16-15-729 applies and that pursuant to the Rule 1 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply.”
Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., Tennessee v. Walter Cuozzo (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 16× “The defendant’s second issue asserts that Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-729 and Pieny v. United Imports, Inc.”
Patrick McGee v. Tommy Jacobs, Jacobs, Cohen & McCormick, PLLC CPAS (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 11× “Analysis This lawsuit requires us to determine whether, under Tennessee Code Annotated § 28-1-105, an action initially adjudicated by the general session court, appealed to the circuit court for de novo review pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 16-15-729, voluntarily…”
Cora M. Haywood v. Trexis Ins. Corp. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-729 . -5- 10, at 115 (3d ed.”
R & J of Tennessee, Inc. v. Blankenship-Melton Real Est., Inc., 166 S.W.3d 195 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 16-15-729 (2003). "Cases appealed from the general sessions court to the circuit court pursuant to Tenn.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.