Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111 (2026)
Hearing - Findings
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) At the expiration of ninety (90) days from the filing of the transcript, the cause shall stand for trial, and shall be heard and determined at the earliest practical date, as one having precedence over other litigation, except suits involving state, county or municipal revenue.
- (b) The hearing shall be on the proof introduced before the board or commission contained in the transcript, and upon such other evidence as either party may desire to introduce.
- (c) The judge shall reduce all findings of fact and conclusions of law to writing and make them parts of the record.
- (d) In making such findings of fact, the judge shall weigh the evidence and determine the facts by the preponderance of the proof.
- (e) If the final decision of a board or commission revokes, suspends, or denies a license or permit that is required prior to engaging in conduct protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and either the petitioner or the respondent requests an expedited hearing, the court shall immediately grant the writ of certiorari, and shall hear the matter and issue its decision within forty (40) days of the court granting the writ of certiorari. When an expedited hearing is requested, the board or commission shall forward the transcript described in § 27-9-109 within seven (7) days of the grant of the writ of certiorari.
Code 1932, § 9014; Acts 1951, ch. 261, § 1; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-911; Acts 1987, ch. 28, §§ 1-3; 1998, ch. 794, § 1; 2002, ch. 615, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2022 · leading case: Jeffries v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 108 S.W.3d 862 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002).
Jeffries v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 108 S.W.3d 862 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “In certiorari proceedings, judicial review is generally limited to the record developed by the tribunal below, and the tribunal is generally bound by its own record.”
Mack Phillips v. Montgomery Cnty., Tennessee, 442 S.W.3d 233 (Tenn. 2014). “§ 27-9-102 (2000) (stating that a party appealing a decision of a board or commission has sixty days to file a petition for writ of certiorari in chancery court); § 27-9-111 (Supp.2013) (providing that within ninety days after the transcript of the case has been filed, the cause…”
Hemontolor v. Wilson Cnty. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 883 S.W.2d 613 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “Whether the lower Court erred in failing to receive additional evidence as permitted by Tennessee Code Annotated Section 27-9-111? Our scope of review, and that of the trial court, under a common law writ of cer-tiorari, is to determine whether the Board exceeded its…”
600 Marshall Ent. Concepts, LLC v. City of Memphis, 375 F. App'x 513 (6th Cir. 2010). “later, as a result of negotiations, 600 Marshall ultimately received a CDP with restrictions as to nudity- On November 17, 2005, subsequent to the panel hearing, but prior to Godwin’s ultimate decision regarding the panel’s recommendation, 600 Marshal sought judicial review of…”
City of Chattanooga v. Cinema , Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-109 . No time limit, however, is placed upon compliance.”
Tucker v. Humphreys Cnty., 944 S.W.2d 613 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996). “(b) The hearing shall be on the proof introduced before the board or commission contained in the transcript, and upon such other evidence as either party may desire to introduce; provided, that all proof shall be taken and filed within seventy-five (75) days from the date upon…”
City of Chattanooga v. Cinema 1, Inc., 150 S.W.3d 390 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “As relevant to this appeal, the plaintiffs in Deja Vu claimed the Nashville/Davidson County ordinance regulating sexually oriented businesses did not provide the necessary assurance of prompt judicial review.”
Hemontolor v. Wilson Cty. Bd. Zon. Appls., 883 S.W.2d 613 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “Whether the lower Court erred in failing to receive additional evidence as permitted by Tennessee Code Annotated Section 27-9-111? Our scope of review, and that of the trial court, under a common law writ of certiorari, is to determine whether the Board exceeded its…”
Andrew Bernard Shute, Jr. v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville, Davidson Cnty., Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111 (c). The court discussed the arguments of the petitioners, found them to be without merit, and accordingly denied the writs and dismissed the two petitions.”
B & B Enter. of Wilson Co., LLC v. City of Lebanon (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111 (c) (Supp. 2004).”
Turnbull Pres. Grp., L.L.C. v. Dickson Cnty., Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2022). “, 2004 WL 2916141 , at *2 (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111 (c)). The trial court’s findings of fact must be based on the preponderance of the evidence; therefore, on appeal, we review the trial court’s findings under the Tenn.”
Jeremy White v. Comm'r Gayle Ray (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “White nevertheless argues that the dismissal of his motion to submit evidence violated Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-111, which provides that a hearing on a writ of certiorari “shall be on the proof introduced before the board or commission contained in the transcript,…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111(b) — 5 cases
Jeffries v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 108 S.W.3d 862 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “In certiorari proceedings, judicial review is generally limited to the record developed by the tribunal below, and the tribunal is generally bound by its own record.”
Hemontolor v. Wilson Cty. Bd. Zon. Appls., 883 S.W.2d 613 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “Whether the lower Court erred in failing to receive additional evidence as permitted by Tennessee Code Annotated Section 27-9-111? Our scope of review, and that of the trial court, under a common law writ of certiorari, is to determine whether the Board exceeded its…”
Jeffery Walton v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016).
Jeremy White v. Comm'r Gayle Ray (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “White nevertheless argues that the dismissal of his motion to submit evidence violated Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-111, which provides that a hearing on a writ of certiorari “shall be on the proof introduced before the board or commission contained in the transcript,…”
Sam Weaver v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Zoning Appeals (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-111(e) — 2 cases
600 Marshall Ent. Concepts, LLC v. City of Memphis, 375 F. App'x 513 (6th Cir. 2010). “later, as a result of negotiations, 600 Marshall ultimately received a CDP with restrictions as to nudity- On November 17, 2005, subsequent to the panel hearing, but prior to Godwin’s ultimate decision regarding the panel’s recommendation, 600 Marshal sought judicial review of…”
City of Chattanooga v. Cinema 1, Inc., 150 S.W.3d 390 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “As relevant to this appeal, the plaintiffs in Deja Vu claimed the Nashville/Davidson County ordinance regulating sexually oriented businesses did not provide the necessary assurance of prompt judicial review.”
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.