Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-30-201 (2026)
Detinue
✓ current as of May 2026
Where the action is to recover specific personal property, if the party seeks to recover the possession only at the end of the suit, the party may bring detinue.
Code 1858, § 2749; Shan., § 4440; Code 1932, § 8566; Acts 1973, ch. 365, § 12(a); T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 23-2301.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (15 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Dale Conrad McQuiston v. Thomas Ward, Sheriff of Perry Cnty. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
Dale Conrad McQuiston v. Thomas Ward, Sheriff of Perry Cnty. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-30-201 (2000). It is difficult to determine from the initial pleading under which statute Mr.”
Jones v. Smith (E.D. Tenn. 2019). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Therefore, to the extent that Plaintiff has been deprived of his property, the Court finds that he has not shown that Tennessee’s statutory remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under §…”
Trusty v. Centurion Health Servs. (E.D. Tenn. 2019). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983.”
Dawson v. Guy (E.D. Tenn. 2020). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). As Plaintiff has not demonstrated that these State remedies are inadequate, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983 for the deprivation of his personal property.”
Reeves v. Tony Parker (E.D. Tenn. 2020). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these State remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983 for the deprivation of his personal property.”
Ware v. Stewart (E.D. Tenn. 2021). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these State remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983 for the deprivation of his personal property.”
Stills v. Greeneville (E.D. Tenn. 2021). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not pled that Tennessee’s post-deprivation procedures are inadequate for redressing the alleged wrong as is necessary to sustain his § 1983 claim.”
Lacy v. Carter Cnty. Sheriffs Off. (E.D. Tenn. 2021). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Next, as to Plaintiff’s request for termination of the individual Defendants, the Court has no authority to require any entity to fire these Defendants.”
Robertson v. Luve (E.D. Tenn. 2021). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not pled that Tennessee’s post-deprivation procedures are inadequate for redressing the alleged wrong as is necessary to sustain a § 1983 claim regarding the theft of his vehicle.”
Duke v. Parker (E.D. Tenn. 2021). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these State remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983 for the deprivation of his personal property.”
Holland v. Booth (E.D. Tenn. 2022). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these State 1 While Plaintiff complains that he was denied various privileges while on lockdown, the record before the Court belies his allegations.”
Parks v. Cobble (E.D. Tenn. 2023). “§ 29-30-101 and § 29-30-201). Plaintiff has not shown that these State remedies are inadequate, and therefore, he has not stated a claim that would entitle him to relief under § 1983 for the loss of his personal property.”
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.