Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (2026)

Availability for receiving reports - Commencement of investigations - Examination and observation of child - Reports - Services provided - Investigators - Interpreter for child who is deaf or hard of hearing

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

Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 915, s 9, eff. 4/27/2022.

Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 849, s 1, eff. 4/20/2022.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 64, s 25, eff. 3/29/2021.

Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 510, Secs.s 1, s 2 eff. 6/3/2019.

Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 345, s 35, eff. 5/10/2019.

Amended by 2019 Tenn. Acts, ch. 329, s 1, eff. 5/8/2019.

Amended by 2015 Tenn. Acts, ch. 231, s 1, eff. 4/21/2015.

Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 236, s 21, eff. 4/19/2013.

Acts 1985, ch. 478, § 41; 1987, ch. 145, §§ 6, 7, 18, 19, 21, 31; 1988, ch. 964, § 2; 2004, ch. 740, §§ 2, 3; 2005, ch. 391, § 10; 2009 , ch. 336, § 1; 2011 , ch. 410, § 3(e); 2012 , ch. 888, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Mullins v. State, 320 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2010).
Mullins v. State, 320 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2010). · cites it 2× “Mullins points to Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-406 (2005 & Supp.2009), which requires DCS to “make a thorough investigation promptly after receiving either an oral or written report of harm,” mandates that “[i]f it appears that the immediate safety or well being of a…”
Carl C. Smith, II v. Anderson Cnty. Sheriff Paul White, 538 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “01(9) (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (i)). An individual so indicated by a DCS investigation may request a formal file review and, if the indicated classification is upheld, an administrative hearing.”
In Re Anouck C. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 19× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (e). -2- the presence of third parties, with a DCS approved interviewer at the CAC.”
Cunningham v. Dep't of Child.'s Servs. (M.D. Tenn. 2020). · cites it 5× “Immunity for Prosecutors and Family Service Workers Defendants Wright and Gray argue they are entitled to immunity for their actions as advocates in the juvenile court. Defendant Wright is an attorney for DCS, and Defendant Gray is an investigator for DCS.”
Jeff & Melissa Fitzpatrick v. State of Tennessee Dep't of Child.'s Servs. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 8× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (a), (i). A report made against an alleged perpetrator is “classified as ‘indicated’ if the preponderance of the evidence, in light of the entire record, proves that the individual committed abuse, severe child abuse, child sexual abuse, or neglect.”
Pethtel v. State of Tennessee Dep't of Child.'s Servs. (TV2) (E.D. Tenn. 2020). · cites it 2× “29 The uncertainty of the Fourth Amendment’s applicability to social workers at the time, in addition to the Tennessee statutes mandating investigation of allegations of child abuse and neglect, Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (a), and granting authority to consent to ordinary…”
Leslie Burke v. State of Tennessee Dep't of Child.'s Servs. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 . DCS further asserts that the claims were not frivolous nor were they intended to “harass, cause unnecessary delay, or cause needless expense.”
Wells v. Ponder (E.D. Tenn. 2025). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 37-1-406 (a), 37-1-412.”
Josh W. Newell v. Jeff Maitland (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “§ 37-1-406. Availability for receiving reports – Commencement of investigations – Examination and observation of child – Reports – Services provided.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406(e) — 2 cases
In Re Anouck C. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2020). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-406 (e). -2- the presence of third parties, with a DCS approved interviewer at the CAC.”
Cunningham v. Dep't of Child.'s Servs. (M.D. Tenn. 2020). “Immunity for Prosecutors and Family Service Workers Defendants Wright and Gray argue they are entitled to immunity for their actions as advocates in the juvenile court. Defendant Wright is an attorney for DCS, and Defendant Gray is an investigator for DCS.”
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.