Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (2026)

Income withholding

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

Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 85, s 2, eff. 4/3/2019.

Acts 1985, ch. 477, § 14; 1986, ch. 890, §§ 2-4, 6, 9; 1987, ch. 306, §§ 15, 16; 1990, ch. 789, §§ 1, 2; 1994, ch. 987, §§ 8-13; 1995, ch. 504, §§ 5-7; 1997 , ch. 551, § 17; 1998, ch. 1098, §§ 18 - 24; 2000, ch. 922, §§ 13 - 16; 2001, ch. 447, §§ 6, 15; 2002, ch. 651, §§ 4, 5; 2004, ch. 735, §§ 1 - 3; 2005, ch. 152, § 1; 2007 , ch. 312, §§ 1, 2; 2007 , ch. 442, § 1; 2009 , ch. 235, § 1; 2009 , ch. 566, § 12.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Roseman v. Roseman, 890 S.W.2d 27 (Tenn. 1994).
Roseman v. Roseman, 890 S.W.2d 27 (Tenn. 1994). · cites it 3× “§ 36-5-607 (b); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (b)(1). Thus, the fact that one of the Roseman children had reached majority was not a defense to the original petition for an income withholding order.”
Lawrence v. Jahn (In Re Lawrence), 219 B.R. 786 (E.D. Tenn. 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 26-2-104(a) provides that “[a]ll moneys received by a resident of the state, as pension from the state of Tennessee, or any subdivision or municipality thereof, before receipt, or while in the resident’s hands or upon deposit in the bank, shall be exempt from execution,…”
Hall v. Hall, 772 S.W.2d 432 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 36-5-501. The lien fixed by the Trial Court did not apply to the earnings of the husband ($100 per week) but to the 10% interest in the profits of his employer.”
Haynes v. Haynes, 904 S.W.2d 118 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “In the present ease, the Trial Court had seen fit to impound the defendant’s salary by “wage assignment” as provided by T.C.A. § 36-5-501, et seq. The cited statute does not appear to prescribe a procedure for enforcement of an assignment.”
Patrick Edward Reeder v. Jo Beth (Curtis) Reeder, 375 S.W.3d 268 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-5-501(a)(2) requires payment of child support by wage assignment unless the court finds good cause not to order wage assignment.”
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). “§ 26-2-104(a) provides that “[a]ll monies received by a resident of the state, as pension from the state of Tennessee, or any subdivision or municipality thereof, before receipt, or while in the resident’s hands or upon deposit in the bank, shall be exempt from execution,…”
In Re Bowman, 109 B.R. 789 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1990). “— (a) All moneys received by a resident of the state, as pension from the state of Tennessee, or any subdivision or municipality thereof, before receipt, or *791 while in his hands or upon deposit in the bank, shall be exempt from execution, attachment or garnishment other than…”
In Re Berry, 268 B.R. 819 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2001). “Tennessee law further provides: (a) All moneys received by a resident of the state, as pension from the state of Tennessee, or any subdivision or municipality thereof, before receipt, or while in the resident’s hands or upon deposit in the bank, shall be exempt from execution,…”
Larry Butler v. Gwendolyn Butler (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 18× “§ 666 (a)(1)(A),(B); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (a)(1) (2001).”
State of Tennessee ex rel., Carla S. (Nelson) Rickard v. Douglas Taylor Holt (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 14× “The trial court, citing Tenn. Code Ann. §36-5-501 , held that “due to the timely payments, and the foregoing good cause, [Mr.”
Mattie Terrell v. Mack Terrell (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 20× “In construing the foregoing statute, we note that section 36-5-501(a) appears to presumptively require that all child support orders issued after July 1, 1994, be paid by income assignment.”
Ronald Strickland v. Tami M. Franklin (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 12× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 . The Western Section of this Court addressed this issue in Terrell v.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a) — 3 cases
Ronald Strickland v. Tami M. Franklin (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 . The Western Section of this Court addressed this issue in Terrell v.”
Mattie Terrell v. Mack Terrell (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “In construing the foregoing statute, we note that section 36-5-501(a) appears to presumptively require that all child support orders issued after July 1, 1994, be paid by income assignment.”
State of Tennessee ex rel., Carla S. (Nelson) Rickard v. Douglas Taylor Holt (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “The trial court, citing Tenn. Code Ann. §36-5-501 , held that “due to the timely payments, and the foregoing good cause, [Mr.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(1) — 7 cases
Mattie Terrell v. Mack Terrell (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “In construing the foregoing statute, we note that section 36-5-501(a) appears to presumptively require that all child support orders issued after July 1, 1994, be paid by income assignment.”
Ronald Strickland v. Tami M. Franklin (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 . The Western Section of this Court addressed this issue in Terrell v.”
Larry Butler v. Gwendolyn Butler (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 666 (a)(1)(A),(B); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (a)(1) (2001).”
Randolph v. Poteet (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2) — 2 cases
Patrick Edward Reeder v. Jo Beth (Curtis) Reeder, 375 S.W.3d 268 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-5-501(a)(2) requires payment of child support by wage assignment unless the court finds good cause not to order wage assignment.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2)(2001) — 1 case
State of Tennessee ex rel., Carla S. (Nelson) Rickard v. Douglas Taylor Holt (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “The trial court, citing Tenn. Code Ann. §36-5-501 , held that “due to the timely payments, and the foregoing good cause, [Mr.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2)(A) — 4 cases
Mattie Terrell v. Mack Terrell (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “In construing the foregoing statute, we note that section 36-5-501(a) appears to presumptively require that all child support orders issued after July 1, 1994, be paid by income assignment.”
Larry Butler v. Gwendolyn Butler (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 666 (a)(1)(A),(B); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (a)(1) (2001).”
Ronald Strickland v. Tami M. Franklin (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 . The Western Section of this Court addressed this issue in Terrell v.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2)(A)(2001) — 1 case
State of Tennessee ex rel., Carla S. (Nelson) Rickard v. Douglas Taylor Holt (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “The trial court, citing Tenn. Code Ann. §36-5-501 , held that “due to the timely payments, and the foregoing good cause, [Mr.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2)(A)(i) — 2 cases
Trevor Howell v. Kennedy Smithwick (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(a)(2)(B) — 4 cases
Larry Butler v. Gwendolyn Butler (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 666 (a)(1)(A),(B); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 (a)(1) (2001).”
Ronald Strickland v. Tami M. Franklin (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501 . The Western Section of this Court addressed this issue in Terrell v.”
Mattie Terrell v. Mack Terrell (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “In construing the foregoing statute, we note that section 36-5-501(a) appears to presumptively require that all child support orders issued after July 1, 1994, be paid by income assignment.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-5-501(b)(1) — 1 case
Roseman v. Roseman, 890 S.W.2d 27 (Tenn. 1994).
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.