Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (2026)
Manner of trial - Title not inquired into
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) The cause shall be tried at the time and place designated, by a single general sessions judge, without the intervention of a jury, and in all respects like other civil suits before the court of general sessions.
- (b) The general sessions judge will try every case upon its merits and ascertain whether the plaintiff or defendant is entitled to the possession of the premises agreeably to the laws governing such cases, and give judgment accordingly.
- (c) The estate, or merits of the title, shall not be inquired into.
Code 1858, §§ 3353, 3354; (deriv. Acts 1821, ch. 14, §20 and Acts 1841-1842, ch. 186, §§ 1, 2); impl. am. Acts 1879, ch. 23, § 1; Shan., §§ 5102, 5103; Code 1932, §§9256, 9257; impl. am. Acts 1979, ch. 68, § 3; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), §§ 23-1619, 23-1620; Acts 1991, ch. 273, § 40.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1992–2019 · leading case: Freda Boyce & Marvell Boyce v. LPP Mortg. LTD, 435 S.W.3d 758 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013).
Freda Boyce & Marvell Boyce v. LPP Mortg. LTD, 435 S.W.3d 758 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (c) (2000). At first glance, it would seem that wrongful foreclosure, being tantamount to an assertion of title, could not constitute a defense in this action.”
Newport Hous. Auth. v. Ballard, 839 S.W.2d 86 (Tenn. 1992). “The State Attorney General joins this cause in defense of the constitutionality of T.C.A. § 29-18-119 and supports the Housing Authority’s contention that no constitutional right to jury trial exists in Tennessee for either party to an unlawful detainer action heard in general…”
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Angeline Renee Drake, 410 S.W.3d 797 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-18-119(c) recites: “The estate, or merits of the title, shall not be inquired into” in a detainer action.”
Edith Johnson v. Mark C. Hopkins, 432 S.W.3d 840 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 29-18-119(a). An unlawful detainer action resolves possessory interests only; the merits of title “shall not be inquired into.”
Gallatin Hous. Auth. v. Mahoganee Pelt, 532 S.W.3d 760 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “§ 29-18-119(b) (2012). In conjunction with the judgment of possession, the judge is also statutorily required to “ascertain the arrearage of rent, interest, and damages, if any, and render judgment therefor.”
Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Deanna R. Lambert (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (emphasis added).”
Ernest Ray Laning v. Johnny Lawrence (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). “Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-18-119, governing detainer actions, states: a) The cause shall be tried at the time and place designated, by a single general sessions judge, without the intervention of a jury, and in all respects like other civil suits before the court of…”
Belgravia Square, LLC v. Melvin White (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (“The general sessions judge will try every case upon its merits and ascertain whether the plaintiff or defendant is entitled to the possession of the premises .”
Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Glenna Robilio (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (c) (2000). Where title bears directly upon the right of possession, however, a party may legitimately interpose the issue.”
CitiFinancial Mortg. Co., Inc. v. Augustus Beasley (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (c) (2000). At first glance, it would seem that wrongful foreclosure, being tantamount to an assertion of title, could not constitute a defense in this action.”
Albert Bell v. Richard Cadmus d/b/a Band-Type Supply (2018). “at 763 (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (b)). In conjunction with the judgment of possession, the general sessions court also entered a money judgment against Mr.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119(a) — 2 cases
Newport Hous. Auth. v. Ballard, 839 S.W.2d 86 (Tenn. 1992). “The State Attorney General joins this cause in defense of the constitutionality of T.C.A. § 29-18-119 and supports the Housing Authority’s contention that no constitutional right to jury trial exists in Tennessee for either party to an unlawful detainer action heard in general…”
Edith Johnson v. Mark C. Hopkins, 432 S.W.3d 840 (Tenn. 2013). “§ 29-18-119(a). An unlawful detainer action resolves possessory interests only; the merits of title “shall not be inquired into.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119(b) — 1 case
Gallatin Hous. Auth. v. Mahoganee Pelt, 532 S.W.3d 760 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “§ 29-18-119(b) (2012). In conjunction with the judgment of possession, the judge is also statutorily required to “ascertain the arrearage of rent, interest, and damages, if any, and render judgment therefor.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119(c) — 2 cases
Freda Boyce & Marvell Boyce v. LPP Mortg. LTD, 435 S.W.3d 758 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-18-119 (c) (2000). At first glance, it would seem that wrongful foreclosure, being tantamount to an assertion of title, could not constitute a defense in this action.”
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Angeline Renee Drake, 410 S.W.3d 797 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-18-119(c) recites: “The estate, or merits of the title, shall not be inquired into” in a detainer action.”
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.