Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-101 (2026)
Right of review
✓ current as of May 2026
Anyone who may be aggrieved by any final order or judgment of any board or commission functioning under the laws of this state may have the order or judgment reviewed by the courts, where not otherwise specifically provided, in the manner provided by this chapter.
Code 1932, § 9008; modified; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-901.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 155
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: City of Brentwood v. Metro. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 149 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).
City of Brentwood v. Metro. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 149 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “4 The scope of Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 (2000), the statute defining who may file these petitions, 5 is, in fact, the same as the scope of Tenn.”
The Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., Tennessee v. The Bd. of Zoning Appeals Of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., Tennessee, 477 S.W.3d 750 (Tenn. 2015). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 (2000) (emphases added) (“Section 101”).”
Moncier v. Jones, 803 F. Supp. 2d 815 (E.D. Tenn. 2011). “3 and Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 et seq. requirements from a different statute, Tenn.”
Davison v. Carr, 659 S.W.2d 361 (Tenn. 1983). “” T.C.A. § 27-9-101 provides: Anyone who may be aggrieved by any final order or judgment of any board or commission functioning under the laws of this state may have said order or judg- .”
Dennis J. Hughes v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, 259 S.W.3d 631 (Tenn. 2008). “3 provided, in pertinent part, as follows: The respondent or the Board may have a review of the judgment of a hearing committee in the manner provided by Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-101 et seq., except as otherwise provided herein.”
Cooper v. Williamson Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 746 S.W.2d 176 (Tenn. 1987). “See also T.C.A. §§ 27-9-101, et seq.; Davison v. Carr, 659 S.”
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “7 Alternatively, the Court of Appeals held that, “even if the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the case as a declaratory judgment action, it had subject matter jurisdiction through the writ of certiorari, codified now at Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101…”
Hawkins v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 127 S.W.3d 749 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “In both McKee and Delta Loan & Finance, the court found that only the statutory writ of certiorari was applicable and that the procedures now appearing in Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 27-9-101 to—114 specifically did not apply.”
Brown v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility of Supreme Court of Tennessee, 29 S.W.3d 445 (Tenn. 2000). “Brown then filed a petition for the writ of certiorari in the chancery court pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 2 to review the decision of the Board denying him relief from costs.”
Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Cawood, 330 S.W.3d 608 (Tenn. 2010). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-101 *609 (2000). To that end, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-102 (2000) states that the aggrieved party shall, within sixty (60) days from the entry of the order or judgment, file a petition of certiorari in the chancery court of any county in which…”
Wood v. Metro. Nashville & Davidson Cnty. Gov't, 196 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-101 (2000). For the purposes of TenmCode Ann.”
Fallin v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 656 S.W.2d 338 (Tenn. 1983). “, § 27-8-101, and T.C.A., §§ 27-9-101 — 27-9-114. This has been done despite the fact that the plain language of these code provisions appear to restrict the remedy afforded thereby to a review of judicial determinations by lower tribunals or administrative agencies.”
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.