Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (2024)
Jurisdiction - Standing
✓ Justia copy: laws through about 2024 (2025 and 2026 sessions missing)
- (a) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this chapter, election contests shall be tried in the chancery court of the division in which the defendant resides. The chief justice of the supreme court shall assign a chancellor from a different division to decide a contested election of chancellor.
- (b) The incumbent office holder and any candidate for the office may contest the outcome of an election for the office. Any campaign committee or individual which has charge of a campaign for the adoption or rejection of a question submitted to the people may contest the election on the question.
Acts 1972, ch. 740, § 1; T.C.A., § 2-1701.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2022 · leading case: City of Oakland v. McCraw, 126 S.W.3d 29 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003).
City of Oakland v. McCraw, 126 S.W.3d 29 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “The basis for Hickory Withe’s motion was its assertion that the trial court’s April 15 Order did not provide a final judgment or resolution on the following issues: (1) “whether the Court had jurisdiction of this matter because the Complaint was not filed within ten (10) days of…”
Brackin v. Sumner Cnty. ex rel. Sumner Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 814 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn. 1991). “These proceedings were initiated in the Chancery Court for Sumner County by plaintiff, James Brackin, to contest an election pursuant to T.C.A. § 2-17-101, in which the voters of Sumner County approved an increase in the motor vehicle wheel tax by a five-vote margin.”
Reinhardt v. Neal, 241 S.W.3d 472 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “1991), our Supreme Court discussed at length the procedures for having an election set aside pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 2-17-101, et seq. According to Forbes , there are two grounds upon which an election contest can be based.”
State ex rel. Inman v. Brock, 622 S.W.2d 36 (Tenn. 1981). “The complaint, as amended, alleged the same facts and circumstances as those *41 of the Davidson County suit, stating, however, that it was brought pursuant to T.C.A. § 2-17-101 as an "election contest.”
Hatcher v. Chairman, 341 S.W.3d 258 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Hatch-er did not file his case as an election contest pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 2-17-101 and 2-17-105. Under these statutes, an “election contest” shall be filed within 10 days after the election.”
Gilpatrick v. Reneau, 661 S.W.2d 863 (Tenn. 1983). “Section one of Chapter 740, Public Acts of 1972, codified as T.C.A. § 2-17-101, expressly limits the bringing of an action to contest an election to “the incumbent office holder and any candidate for the office.”
Forbes v. Bell, 816 S.W.2d 716 (Tenn. 1991). “§ 2-17-105 is clear and unambiguous in its statement that “[t]he complaint contesting an election under § 2-17-101 shall be filed within ten (10) days after the election.”
Stuart v. Anderson Cnty. Election Comm'n, 237 S.W.3d 297 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “§ 2-17-101, et seq. The Forbes Court began by observing that there are two grounds upon which an election contest can be based.”
Kenneth T. Whalum, Jr. v. Shelby Cnty. Election Comm'n, No. W2013-02076-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 30, 2014). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (discussed in detail, infra).”
Brenda Woods v. Cathy N. Jones, 204 S.W.3d 788 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). “The statute provides simply that a “complaint contesting an election under § 2-17-101 shall be filed within ten (10) days after the election.”
Fraternal Order Of Police v. Metro. Gov't Of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., No. M2018-01717-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 11, 2019). “It should be brought under Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (b)!” Suddenly, mootness is relevant, and the concerns about disrupting the election have been consigned to the dustbin of history.”
Mickell Lowery v. Michael Redmond, No. W2021-00611-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1618218 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 23, 2022). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (a). At the trial level, Appellee argued that the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction based on, inter alia, section 2-17-101(a), because he was seeking relief in relation to an election matter (he was running for elected office and alleged…”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101(a): 1 case
Mickell Lowery v. Michael Redmond, No. W2021-00611-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1618218 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 23, 2022). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (a). At the trial level, Appellee argued that the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction based on, inter alia, section 2-17-101(a), because he was seeking relief in relation to an election matter (he was running for elected office and alleged…”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101(b): 8 cases
Brackin v. Sumner Cnty. ex rel. Sumner Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 814 S.W.2d 57 (Tenn. 1991). “These proceedings were initiated in the Chancery Court for Sumner County by plaintiff, James Brackin, to contest an election pursuant to T.C.A. § 2-17-101, in which the voters of Sumner County approved an increase in the motor vehicle wheel tax by a five-vote margin.”
City of Oakland v. McCraw, 126 S.W.3d 29 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “The basis for Hickory Withe’s motion was its assertion that the trial court’s April 15 Order did not provide a final judgment or resolution on the following issues: (1) “whether the Court had jurisdiction of this matter because the Complaint was not filed within ten (10) days of…”
Kenneth T. Whalum, Jr. v. Shelby Cnty. Election Comm'n, No. W2013-02076-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 30, 2014). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-17-101 (discussed in detail, infra).”
Kenneth T. Whalum, Jr. v. Shelby Cnty. Election Comm'n - Concurring/Dissenting, No. W2013-02076-COA-R3-CV, 2014 WL 4919601 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 30, 2014).
William Thomas McFarland v. Michael S. Pemberton, No. E2014-02176-SC-R11-CV (Tenn. Sept. 20, 2017).
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.