Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-15-102 (2026)
Right to ejectment
✓ current as of May 2026
Any person having a valid subsisting legal interest in real property, and a right to the immediate possession thereof, may recover the same by an action of ejectment.
Code 1858, § 3229; Shan., § 4970; Code 1932, § 9118; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 23-1302.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1984–2017 · leading case: Newport Hous. Auth. v. Ballard, 839 S.W.2d 86 (Tenn. 1992).
Newport Hous. Auth. v. Ballard, 839 S.W.2d 86 (Tenn. 1992). “” However, under T.C.A. § 29-15-102 the right to ejectment is vested in any person having a valid subsisting legal interest in real property, and a right to the immediate possession thereof to recover the same by an action of ejectment.”
Johnson v. City of Mt. Pleasant, 713 S.W.2d 659 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985). “The adverse possession statutes of the State of Tennessee cannot apply to a governmental entity which acquires property for public purpose without condemning the same since the landowner or his successors in title have no right to eject' the municipality from the property and…”
Twinton Props. P'ship v. Nidiffer (In Re Twinton Props. P'ship), 44 B.R. 426 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1984). “§ 29-15-102 provides that: Any person having a valid subsisting legal interest in real property, and a right to immediate possession thereof, may recover the same by an action of ejectment.”
Josephine Phelps v. Vern Benke, Jr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-15-102 . Save for a conclusory assertion that Mr.”
Mary Jane Bridgewater v. Robert S. Adamczyk (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “9 “Any person feeling aggrieved by the recording of any such affidavit, may, at any time within six (6) years of the recording of the affidavit, bring a suit in the chancery court of the county where the affidavit may be recorded, challenging the verity of any or all of the…”
Jo Taylor v. Wendell Harris & Jo Taylor v. Louie R. Ladd (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “In their complaint in the action against the Ladds and the Norwoods, the Womacks sought, inter alia, that “it be adjudged and finally determined that the Plaintiffs are the lawful owners and vested with absolute and unencumbered title in fee simple to the property described in…”
John W. Johnson v. Bernice Wade (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “From our reading of the record, the trial court made every available concession required 2 Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-15-102 p rovides: “Any person having a valid subsisting legal interest in rea l property, and a right to th e immedia te possessio n thereof, ma y recover the same by…”
Dunegan v. Griffith, 253 S.W.3d 164 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “§ 29-15-102, is written in permissive, not mandatory, terms: “[a]ny person having a valid subsisting legal interest in real property, and a right to the immediate possession thereof, may recover the same by an action for ejectment.”
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.