Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-14-103 (2026)
Construction of statutes and written instruments
✓ current as of May 2026
Any person interested under a deed, will, written contract, or other writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract, or franchise, may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract, or franchise and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder.
Acts 1923, ch. 29, § 2; Shan. Supp., § 4726a2; Code 1932, §8836; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 23-1103.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 107
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Stephen Michael West v. Derrick D. Schofield, 460 S.W.3d 113 (Tenn. 2015).
Stephen Michael West v. Derrick D. Schofield, 460 S.W.3d 113 (Tenn. 2015). “” The Complaint asserts that the chancery court “has jurisdiction pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 29-14-103 , 29-14-113.”
Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827 (Tenn. 2008). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103 (2000). Of particular relevance to this case, the Act provides that “[a]ny person .”
May v. Carlton, 245 S.W.3d 340 (Tenn. 2008). “May has other, more established remedies available to him. Specifically, should Mr.”
Tennessee Div. of United Daughters of Confederacy v. Vanderbilt Univ., 174 S.W.3d 98 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “'s cause of action for breach of contract as sufficient to put at issue Vanderbilt's alleged breach of the conditions contained in the 1913, 1927, and 1933 agreements.”
Highwoods Props., Inc. v. City of Memphis, 297 S.W.3d 695 (Tenn. 2009). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-14-103 (2000). “[W ]hether to entertain a declaratory judgment action is, in certain situations, largely discretionary with the trial judge.”
State Ex Rel. Moore & Assocs., Inc. v. West, 246 S.W.3d 569 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “Declaratory Judgment Moore & Associates also argues that it was entitled to proceed directly to court under the Declaratory Judgment Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103, which provides that any person whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute or…”
Bernard v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., 237 S.W.3d 658 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103. The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for adjudication of the declara *666 tory judgment action.”
Campbell v. Sundquist, 926 S.W.2d 250 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996). “T.C.A. § 29-14-103 provides: Construction of statutes and written instruments.”
Dobbs v. Guenther, 846 S.W.2d 270 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992). “The complaint demonstrates that Mr. and Mrs.”
Cannon Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. Wade, 178 S.W.3d 725 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “2d 861, 863 (1968); Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103 (2000). The fact that the party seeking declaratory relief is not entitled to the judgment sought (that it is on the losing side of the controversy) does not mean that the parties are not entitled to the relief from uncertainty that…”
Clinton Books, Inc. v. City of Memphis, 197 S.W.3d 749 (Tenn. 2006). “The plaintiffs contend that the trial court has equitable jurisdiction over their businesses and their business property based upon Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-14-103 (2000) of the Declaratory Judgment Act.”
N. Telecom, Inc. v. Taylor, 781 S.W.2d 837 (Tenn. 1989). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103(1980). The key to the jurisdictional question in this case is found in the words of the act itself.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-14-103(1980) — 2 cases
N. Telecom, Inc. v. Taylor, 781 S.W.2d 837 (Tenn. 1989). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-14-103(1980). The key to the jurisdictional question in this case is found in the words of the act itself.”
State of Tennessee ex rel Paul Allen v. The City of Newport, 422 S.W.3d 567 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013).
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.