Tenn. Code Ann. » Tenn. Code / Title 29 / Chapter 20 / Part 1
Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-104 (2026)

Applicability of other laws

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Acts 1973, ch. 345, § 30; 1980, ch. 828, § 1; T.C.A., § 23-3304.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1983–2019 · leading case: Richard Moreno v. City of Clarksville, 479 S.W.3d 795 (Tenn. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Richard Moreno v. City of Clarksville, 479 S.W.3d 795 (Tenn. 2015). · cites it 8× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-104 (a). - 22 - Ann.”
Jenkins v. Loudon Cnty., 736 S.W.2d 603 (Tenn. 1987). · cites it 6× “§ 29-20-104, which refers to a number of statutes displaced by the GTLA; however, the subjects covered by each referenced statute are specifically addressed elsewhere in the GTLA and these displaced provisions (T.C.A. §§ 7-31-103, 7-31-112, 7-51-202 [6] and 7-51-203) addressed…”
Lucius v. City of Memphis, 925 S.W.2d 522 (Tenn. 1996). · cites it 6× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(a)(1980 Repl.)(emphasis added).”
Collier v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div., 657 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 6× “In 1980 an amendment to the Act produced Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b): (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the provisions of §§ 28-1-106 — 28-1-108 shall apply in causes of action arising pursuant to this chapter.”
Krisinda Bowers, A Minor, by next friend, Tammy K. Bowers & Steve Bowers v. Stephen Hammond, 954 S.W.2d 752 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 7× “Citing Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-20-104, Krisinda, through her parents, contends that the foregoing notice provisions are not applicable to minors.”
Doe a v. Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 852 S.W.2d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “1983); Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b) (1980). 3 .”
Lynn v. City of Jackson, 63 S.W.3d 332 (Tenn. 2001). “§ 29-20-104(b) (“Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the provisions of T.”
Williams v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div., 773 S.W.2d 522 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “See T.C.A. § 29-20-104 (1980). *524 In his brief Williams has asked, In the event the Court finds the arguments contained herein unpersuasive, plaintiffs are moving this Court to be allowed to raise the issues of the invalidity and unconstitutionality of [the Act] .”
Daniel Ex Rel. Daniel v. Hardin Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 971 S.W.2d 21 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “See T.C.A. § 29-20-104 (1980). Flodie Daniel died on March 20, 1994.”
Flowers v. Dyer Cnty., 830 S.W.2d 51 (Tenn. 1992). · cites it 2× “The intermediate appellate court, relying on T.C.A. § 29-20-104(a) and T.C.A. § 29-20-201(c) noted that the subject statutes provide that all acts or statutes in conflict with the provisions of the GTLA shall only be applicable to government entities exercising the right not to…”
Rael v. Montgomery Cnty., 769 S.W.2d 211 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b) (emphasis supplied).”
Hensley v. Fowler, 920 S.W.2d 649 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “” Actions for the non-negligent misconduct of deputies do not “aris[e] pursuant to” the GTLA, T.C.A. § 29-20-104(b), and may *652 therefore be covered by T.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-104(a) — 6 cases
Richard Moreno v. City of Clarksville, 479 S.W.3d 795 (Tenn. 2015). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-104 (a). - 22 - Ann.”
Lucius v. City of Memphis, 925 S.W.2d 522 (Tenn. 1996). “” Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(a)(1980 Repl.)(emphasis added).”
Jenkins v. Loudon Cnty., 736 S.W.2d 603 (Tenn. 1987). “§ 29-20-104, which refers to a number of statutes displaced by the GTLA; however, the subjects covered by each referenced statute are specifically addressed elsewhere in the GTLA and these displaced provisions (T.C.A. §§ 7-31-103, 7-31-112, 7-51-202 [6] and 7-51-203) addressed…”
Flowers v. Dyer Cnty., 830 S.W.2d 51 (Tenn. 1992). “The intermediate appellate court, relying on T.C.A. § 29-20-104(a) and T.C.A. § 29-20-201(c) noted that the subject statutes provide that all acts or statutes in conflict with the provisions of the GTLA shall only be applicable to government entities exercising the right not to…”
Rooks v. Chattanooga Elec. Power Bd., 738 F. Supp. 1163 (E.D. Tenn. 1990).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b) — 12 cases
Collier v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div., 657 S.W.2d 771 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). “In 1980 an amendment to the Act produced Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b): (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the provisions of §§ 28-1-106 — 28-1-108 shall apply in causes of action arising pursuant to this chapter.”
Krisinda Bowers, A Minor, by next friend, Tammy K. Bowers & Steve Bowers v. Stephen Hammond, 954 S.W.2d 752 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “Citing Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-20-104, Krisinda, through her parents, contends that the foregoing notice provisions are not applicable to minors.”
Jenkins v. Loudon Cnty., 736 S.W.2d 603 (Tenn. 1987). “§ 29-20-104, which refers to a number of statutes displaced by the GTLA; however, the subjects covered by each referenced statute are specifically addressed elsewhere in the GTLA and these displaced provisions (T.C.A. §§ 7-31-103, 7-31-112, 7-51-202 [6] and 7-51-203) addressed…”
Doe a v. Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 852 S.W.2d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992). “1983); Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-20-104(b) (1980). 3 .”
Lynn v. City of Jackson, 63 S.W.3d 332 (Tenn. 2001). “§ 29-20-104(b) (“Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the provisions of T.”
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.