Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (2026)
Remand for correction of record
✓ current as of May 2026
The court shall also, in all cases, where, in its opinion, complete justice cannot be had by reason of some defect in the record, want of proper parties, or oversight without culpable negligence, remand the cause to the court below for further proceedings, with proper directions to effectuate the objects of the order, and upon such terms as may be deemed right.
Code 1858, § 3170; Shan., § 4905; Code 1932, § 9054; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-329.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: State v. Byington, 284 S.W.3d 220 (Tenn. 2009).
State v. Byington, 284 S.W.3d 220 (Tenn. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (2000). This Court has stated on prior occasion that “[t]he procedure for correcting or modifying the record reflects the dual goals of avoiding technicality and expediting a just resolution of the case on its merits.”
Ruff v. Raleigh Assembly of God Church, Inc., 241 S.W.3d 876 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “On remand pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 27-3-128, the trial court entered judgment in favor of Defendant with respect to Plaintiffs claim for assault.”
McClain v. Kimbrough Const. Co., Inc., 806 S.W.2d 194 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990). “Accordingly, pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (1980), 9 we vacate the damage award and remand the case to the trial court for the calculation of the damages McClain incurred as a result of Kimbrough’s unilateral termination of the contract.”
State Ex Rel. Vaughn v. Kaatrude, 21 S.W.3d 244 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (1980); Haury and Smith Realty Co.”
Cocke Cnty. Bd. of High. Commissioners v. Newport Utils. Bd., 690 S.W.2d 231 (Tenn. 1985). “See, T.C.A., § 27-3-128. The other issues involved in the instant appeal involved Newport’s indemnification claim against Pierce.”
Parker v. Lambert, 206 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). “See, Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (2005). The final issue is whether the Trial Court erred in awarding attorney’s fees only to Parker? Essentially Lambert argues the Court cannot award attorney’s fees to Parker without also awarding them to him.”
Hazard v. Hazard, 833 S.W.2d 911 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “Therefore, pursuant to T.C.A. § 27-3-128 (1980) the case should be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings to ascertain the proper amount of spousal support to be awarded, and the present award shall remain in effect pending further orders of the trial court.”
Murvin v. Cofer, 968 S.W.2d 304 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “See T.C.A. § 27-3-128. 6 In doing so, we express no opinion as to whether the plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages.”
First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Hurd Lock & Mfg. Co., 816 S.W.2d 38 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “— The court shall also, in all cases, where, in its opinion, complete justice cannot be had by reason of some defect in the record, want of proper parties, or oversight without culpable negligence, remand the cause to the court below for further proceedings, with proper…”
Turner v. Turner, 919 S.W.2d 340 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). “In cases where the record indicates that more satisfactory proof can be presented, we have invoked Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-3-128 (1980) to remand the case for more satisfactory evidence to enable the trial court to render a more appropriate decision.”
Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452 (Tenn. 1988). “, supra , unlike the present case, the record contained no evidence of permanence, but rather than deny the employee any recovery, the Court concluded "that complete justice cannot be had in this case in the absence of medical testimony with respect to [the employee's] permanent…”
Killian v. Campbell, 760 S.W.2d 218 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988). “Section 27-3-128. As stated, there was no effort made to prove damages at the original trial.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-3-128(2000) — 1 case
Ruff v. Raleigh Assembly of God Church, Inc., 241 S.W.3d 876 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “On remand pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 27-3-128, the trial court entered judgment in favor of Defendant with respect to Plaintiffs claim for assault.”
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.