Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 (2026)

Defendants named in petition

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The petition shall be addressed to the presiding chancellor and shall name as defendants the particular board or commission and such other parties of record, if such, as were involved in the hearing before the board or commission, and who do not join as petitioners.

Code 1932, § 9008; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-904.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases, 1990–2019 · leading case: Steppach v. Thomas, 346 S.W.3d 488 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Steppach v. Thomas, 346 S.W.3d 488 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “, and the City Council, wherein he is listed as the owner and/or applicant of the proposed Street Closure and Planned Development site, the writ of certiorari statute, Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-104, requires Mr. Thomas’ continued participation in the action despite the transfer of…”

Roland Digit. Media, Inc. v. City of Livingston (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 25× “02(1) motion for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the petition failed to name the Livingston Board of Zoning Appeals, whose decision was at issue, as a defendant as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 . This appeal followed.”

Bush v. Emp. Benefit Bd. of the Metro. Gov't, 792 S.W.2d 932 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-104 (1989) specifically provides that the petition for certiorari must name as defendants “the particular board or commission .”

Calvin Tankesly v. Sgt. Pugh (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 8× “Tankesly had sued improper parties, the warden and the disciplinary board chairman, and according to Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 “the only proper respondent is the Tennessee Department of Correction.”

Jeffery Walton v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “On June 24, 2015, the trial court entered an order of dismissal, wherein it: (1) granted the CCA Respondents‟ motion to dismiss on the ground that Tennessee Code Annotated Section 27-9-104 specifically “exempts CCA employees as parties to a writ of certiorari action”; (2) found…”

John Seals v. James Bowlen, Warden (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 5× “The State moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim, on the grounds that (1) only the Department of Correction was a proper party under Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 and (2) Mr. Seals’s petition failed to allege that the board had exceeded its jurisdiction or acted illegally or…”

City of Knoxville v. The City of Knoxville Pension Bd. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “While Levy, citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 , states that parties to an administrative proceeding continue to be parties to a review under a writ of certiorari, it does not stand for the proposition that to have standing to file a petition for review of a final decision of any…”

Cedric Franklin v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “The court held that the claim against the individual defendants had to be dismissed because the only proper respondent under Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 was the Disciplinary Board itself.”

William Thomas McFarland v. Michael S. Pemberton (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “While Levy, citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-104 , states that parties to an administrative proceeding continue to be parties to a review under a writ of certiorari, it does not stand for the proposition that to have standing to file a petition for review of a final decision of any…”

Sweatt v. Bd. of Paroles (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “Section 27-9-104 of the Tennessee Code provides, “[t]he petition shall be addressed to the presiding chancellor and shall name as defendants the particular board or commission and such other parties of record, if such, as were involved in the hearing before the board or…”

Joe Dyer v. Bd. of Paroles (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “First of all, the trial court properly dismissed Charles Traughber, individually, as neither he or other individual members of the Tennessee Board of Paroles are proper parties defendant under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-104. Secondly, in making the assertion that he…”

Buford v. TDOC (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 27-9-104 (1980) provides: The petition shall be addressed to the presiding chancellor and shall name as defendants the particular board or commission and such other parties of record, if such, as were involved in the hearing before the board or commission, and who do…”

Show all 13 citing cases →

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.