Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114 (2026)
Proceedings involving certain public employees
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a)
- (1) Contested case hearings by civil service boards of a county or municipality which affect the employment status of a civil service employee shall be conducted in conformity with contested case procedures under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, compiled in title 4, chapter 5, part 3.
- (2) The provisions of subdivision (a)(1) pertaining to hearings by civil service boards shall not apply to municipal utilities boards or civil service boards of counties organized under a home rule charter form of government.
- (b)
- (1) Judicial review of decisions by civil service boards of a county or municipality which affects the employment status of a county or city civil service employee shall be in conformity with the judicial review standards under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, § 4-5-322.
- (2) Petitions for judicial review of decisions by a city or county civil service board affecting the employment status of a civil service employee shall be filed in the chancery court of the county wherein the local civil service board is located.
- (3) In any appeal pursuant to this section deemed by the court to be frivolous, the sanctions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 may be applied by the chancellors.
- (c) This section shall not apply to the benefit board of any county having a metropolitan form of government that has a population in excess of five hundred thousand (500,000), or to the benefit board of any county having a population in excess of eight hundred thousand (800,000), both according to the 2000 federal census or any subsequent federal census. This subsection (c) shall have no effect in any county unless it is approved by a resolution adopted by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the legislative body of any county to which this subsection (c) applies. The approval or nonapproval of this subsection (c) shall be proclaimed by the presiding officer of the legislative body and certified to the secretary of state.
Acts 1949, ch. 266, §§ 1, 2; C. Supp. 1950, § 9018.1; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-914; Acts 1988, ch. 1001, § 1; 1990, ch. 629, §1; 2008 , ch. 757, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 110
cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Tidwell v. City of Memphis, 193 S.W.3d 555 (Tenn. 2006).
Tidwell v. City of Memphis, 193 S.W.3d 555 (Tenn. 2006). “Specifically, the chancellor concluded that (1) Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 (2000), which governs review of the rulings of civil service boards, applies to decisions rendered by the City’s OJI Panel; (2) the proper method of judicial review of decisions rendered by…”
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Cnty. of Shelby v. Tompkins, 241 S.W.3d 500 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “civil service boards of counties organized under a home rule charter form of government”). Nonetheless, a reviewing court must have sufficient information regarding the agency action to determine whether that action comports with the law and to avoid substituting its judgment…”
MacOn v. Shelby Cnty. Gov't Civil Serv. Merit Bd., 309 S.W.3d 504 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114, a decision by a county civil service board that affects the employment status of a civil servant is subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, as codified at section…”
City of Memphis v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 216 S.W.3d 311 (Tenn. 2007). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-114 (Supp.2003). Thus, in accordance with the terms of the statute, this Court will review the decision of the Commission under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act rather than the common law writ of certiorari.”
Goodwin v. Metro. Bd. of Health, 656 S.W.2d 383 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). “A Writ of Certiora-ri pursuant to T.C.A. § 27-9-114 was issued by 'the Chancellor to review the action of the hearing board.”
City of Memphis v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 238 S.W.3d 238 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114 (b)(1) (2000).”
Mitchell v. Madison Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 325 S.W.3d 603 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “T.C.A. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (2000). Under the contested case provisions of the UAPA, as provided for in Tennessee Code Annotated § 4-5-311 (a), Mitchell claimed that the Commission was empowered to "issue subpoenas, effect discovery, and issue protective orders, in accordance with…”
City of Memphis v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 239 S.W.3d 202 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “See § 27-9-114; Tidwell v. City of Memphis, 193 S.”
State Ex Rel. Byram v. City of Brentwood, 833 S.W.2d 500 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “In this case one matter would be limited by rules of cer-tiorari review and the other would be reviewed under 13(d), Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure.”
Dave Brundage v. Cumberland Cnty., 357 S.W.3d 361 (Tenn. 2011). “, Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (Supp.2011) (decisions by certain county or municipal civil service boards).”
Carl C. Smith, II v. Anderson Cnty. Sheriff Paul White, 538 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “2006) (concluding that “under section 27-9-114,” proceedings before a city’s on-the-job inquiry panel, “as well as the standard of judicial review of its decisions, are governed by the UAPA.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a) — 5 cases
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Kent v. Civil Serv. Merit Bd., 652 S.W.2d 350 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983).
Kenneth Marino v. Bd. of Admin. City of Memphis Ret. Sys. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015).
Steve Paschall v. Pension Bd. of the Memphis Light Gas & Water Div. Ret. & Pension Sys. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2026).
Derek Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't (Tenn. 2009).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a)(1) — 11 cases
Tidwell v. City of Memphis, 193 S.W.3d 555 (Tenn. 2006). “Specifically, the chancellor concluded that (1) Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 (2000), which governs review of the rulings of civil service boards, applies to decisions rendered by the City’s OJI Panel; (2) the proper method of judicial review of decisions rendered by…”
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Mitchell v. Madison Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 325 S.W.3d 603 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “T.C.A. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (2000). Under the contested case provisions of the UAPA, as provided for in Tennessee Code Annotated § 4-5-311 (a), Mitchell claimed that the Commission was empowered to "issue subpoenas, effect discovery, and issue protective orders, in accordance with…”
Dave Brundage v. Cumberland Cnty., 357 S.W.3d 361 (Tenn. 2011). “, Tenn.Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (Supp.2011) (decisions by certain county or municipal civil service boards).”
Roy L. Tidwell & Richard Coggins v. City of Memphis (Tenn. 2006).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a)(2) — 10 cases
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Tidwell v. City of Memphis, 193 S.W.3d 555 (Tenn. 2006). “Specifically, the chancellor concluded that (1) Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 (2000), which governs review of the rulings of civil service boards, applies to decisions rendered by the City’s OJI Panel; (2) the proper method of judicial review of decisions rendered by…”
MacOn v. Shelby Cnty. Gov't Civil Serv. Merit Bd., 309 S.W.3d 504 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114, a decision by a county civil service board that affects the employment status of a civil servant is subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, as codified at section…”
Cnty. of Shelby v. Tompkins, 241 S.W.3d 500 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “civil service boards of counties organized under a home rule charter form of government”). Nonetheless, a reviewing court must have sufficient information regarding the agency action to determine whether that action comports with the law and to avoid substituting its judgment…”
Kenneth Marino v. Bd. of Admin. City of Memphis Ret. Sys. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(a)(l) — 1 case
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(b) — 9 cases
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Steve Paschall v. Pension Bd. of the Memphis Light Gas & Water Div. Ret. & Pension Sys. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2026).
Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't v. Mark Lowe (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008).
Madison Cnty., Tennessee v. Vatisha Evans-Barken (Tenn. Ct. App. 2026).
City of Memphis, a Mun. Corp. v. The Civil Serv. Comm'n of the City of Memphis & Tommy Moore (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(b)(1) — 21 cases
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
Penny v. City of Memphis, 276 S.W.3d 410 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008).
Mitchell v. Madison Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 325 S.W.3d 603 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “T.C.A. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (2000). Under the contested case provisions of the UAPA, as provided for in Tennessee Code Annotated § 4-5-311 (a), Mitchell claimed that the Commission was empowered to "issue subpoenas, effect discovery, and issue protective orders, in accordance with…”
Miller v. Civil Serv. Com'n, 271 S.W.3d 659 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008).
Miller v. Civil Serv. Comm'n of the Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., 271 S.W.3d 659 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(b)(1)(2000) — 1 case
Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't v. Mark Lowe (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(b)(3) — 1 case
City of Memphis, a Mun. Corp. v. The Civil Serv. Comm'n of the City of Memphis & Tommy Moore (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-9-114(b)(l) — 5 cases
Davis v. Shelby Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 278 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2009). “Prior to January 1, 1989, Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114 18 provided, in pertinent part: No court of record of this state shall entertain any proceeding involving the civil service status of a county or municipal employee when such proceeding is in the nature of an…”
MacOn v. Shelby Cnty. Gov't Civil Serv. Merit Bd., 309 S.W.3d 504 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-114, a decision by a county civil service board that affects the employment status of a civil servant is subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, as codified at section…”
Cnty. of Shelby v. Tompkins, 241 S.W.3d 500 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “civil service boards of counties organized under a home rule charter form of government”). Nonetheless, a reviewing court must have sufficient information regarding the agency action to determine whether that action comports with the law and to avoid substituting its judgment…”
Jim Hammond, Sheriff of Hamilton Cnty. v. Chris Harvey, 410 S.W.3d 306 (Tenn. 2013).
Mitchell v. Madison Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 325 S.W.3d 603 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “T.C.A. § 27-9-114(a)(1) (2000). Under the contested case provisions of the UAPA, as provided for in Tennessee Code Annotated § 4-5-311 (a), Mitchell claimed that the Commission was empowered to "issue subpoenas, effect discovery, and issue protective orders, in accordance with…”
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.