Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (2026)
Petition to dismiss legal action filed in response to party's exercise of the right of free speech, right to petition, or right of association - Response - Stay of discovery
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) If a legal action is filed in response to a party's exercise of the right of free speech, right to petition, or right of association, that party may petition the court to dismiss the legal action.
- (b) Such a petition may be filed within sixty (60) calendar days from the date of service of the legal action or, in the court's discretion, at any later time that the court deems proper.
- (c) A response to the petition, including any opposing affidavits, may be served and filed by the opposing party no less than five (5) days before the hearing or, in the court's discretion, at any earlier time that the court deems proper.
- (d) All discovery in the legal action is stayed upon the filing of a petition under this section. The stay of discovery remains in effect until the entry of an order ruling on the petition. The court may allow specified and limited discovery relevant to the petition upon a showing of good cause.
Added by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 185,s 1, eff. 7/1/2019.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (29 in the last 5 years), 2021–2026 · leading case: Trevor Adamson v. Sarah E. Grove, No. M2020-01651-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 17334223 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2022).
Trevor Adamson v. Sarah E. Grove, No. M2020-01651-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 17334223 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2022). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a)-(b). According to the Act, (a) The petitioning party has the burden of making a prima facie case that a legal action against the petitioning party is based on, relates to, or is in response to that party’s exercise of the right to free speech,…”
Secure Air Charter, LLC v. Michael John Barrett, Jr., No. M2025-00312-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 19, 2026). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 . Interpretation of the statutory provisions of the TPPA “entails a question of law, which we review de novo upon the record with no presumption of correctness for the determination of the courts below.”
Bill Charles v. Donna McQueen, No. M2021-00878-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 4490980 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 28, 2022). “2021) (citing Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 20-17-104 (a), 20-17-105).”
John Doe v. Jane Roe, 638 S.W.3d 614 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). Following a hearing, the trial court denied Roe’s motion, finding that the matter was not one of public concern such as to warrant the application of the TPPA.”
Alice Cartwright Garner v. Thomason, Hendrix, Harvey, Johnson & Mitchell, PLLC, No. W2022-01636-COA-R3-CV, 2024 WL 1618897 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 15, 2024). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). This case involves only the right to petition.”
Alan C. Cartwright v. Thomason Hendrix, P.C., No. W2022-01627-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 15, 2024). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). This case involves only the right to petition.”
Am. Addiction Centers, Inc. v. Nat'l Ass'n of Addiction Treatment Providers, 515 F. Supp. 3d 820 (M.D. Tenn. 2021). “Tennessee law provides that “[i]f a legal action is filed in response to a party’s exercise of the right of free speech, right to petition, or right of association, that party may petition the court to dismiss the legal action.”
Jessica Hampton v. Daniel Millsaps, No. M2024-01036-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2026). “§§ 20-17-104 (a), 20-17-105. Specifically, if the petitioning party makes a prima facie case that they have participated in protected activity under the TPPA, the court may then dismiss the action against them, “unless the responding party establishes a prima facie case for each…”
Jayesh Patel v. Shailesh Patel, No. M2024-01371-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 19, 2026). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). The statute provides a structured burden-shifting framework for evaluating whether a legal action should be dismissed at an early stage.”
Rachel Reiss v. Rock Creek Constr., Inc. (2022). “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 20-17-104 (a), 20-17-105.”
Kedalo Constr., LLC v. Linda Duygul Ward (2024). “The plaintiffs’ “Supplemental Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint and Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a) Petition to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act” reveals that the plaintiffs made no…”
Alan C. Cartwright v. Thomason Hendrix, P.C. (Tenn. 2025). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). Courts apply a burden-shifting framework to evaluate a petition to dismiss under the TPPA.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104(a): 5 cases
Jessica Hampton v. Daniel Millsaps, No. M2024-01036-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2026). “§§ 20-17-104 (a), 20-17-105. Specifically, if the petitioning party makes a prima facie case that they have participated in protected activity under the TPPA, the court may then dismiss the action against them, “unless the responding party establishes a prima facie case for each…”
Trevor Seth Adamson v. Sarah E. Grove, No. M2020-01651-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2021).
Secure Air Charter, LLC v. Michael John Barrett, Jr., No. M2025-00312-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 19, 2026). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 . Interpretation of the statutory provisions of the TPPA “entails a question of law, which we review de novo upon the record with no presumption of correctness for the determination of the courts below.”
Bill Charles v. Donna McQueen, 693 S.W.3d 262 (Tenn. 2024).
Alan C. Cartwright v. Thomason Hendrix, P.C. (Tenn. 2025). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). Courts apply a burden-shifting framework to evaluate a petition to dismiss under the TPPA.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104(b): 1 case
Alice Cartwright Garner v. Thomason, Hendrix, Harvey, Johnson & Mitchell, PLLC, No. W2022-01636-COA-R3-CV, 2024 WL 1618897 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 15, 2024). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104 (a). This case involves only the right to petition.”
Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-104(d): 1 case
Bill Charles v. Donna McQueen, 693 S.W.3d 262 (Tenn. 2024).
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.