Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-614 (2026)

Evidentiary privileges inapplicable in child sexual abuse cases

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

The privileged quality of communication between husband and wife and between any professional person and the professional person's patient or client, and any other privileged communication, except that between attorney and client, as such communication relates both to the competency of the witness and to the exclusion of confidential communications, shall not apply to any situation involving known or suspected child sexual abuse and shall not constitute grounds for failure to report as required by this part, failure to cooperate with the department in its activities pursuant to this part, or failure to give evidence in any judicial proceeding relating to child sexual abuse.

Acts 1985, ch. 478, § 15.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1996–2017 · leading case: State v. Smith, 933 S.W.2d 450 (Tenn. 1996).
State v. Smith, 933 S.W.2d 450 (Tenn. 1996). · cites it 12× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-614 . As this privilege was created by statute, it is without a doubt subject to limitation or removal as the legislature may see fit.”
State Dep't of Child.'s Servs. v. M.P., 173 S.W.3d 794 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 3× “This determination is evident in the legislature’s enactment of Tenn.Code Ann. § 37-1-614 which expressly states that the only evidentiary privileges recognized in a situation involving child sex abuse are between attorney and client.”
United States v. Mathis, 377 F. Supp. 2d 640 (M.D. Tenn. 2005). “nd the professional person’s patient or client, and any other privileged communication except that between attorney and client, as such communication relates both to the competency of the witness and to the exclusion of confidential communications, shall not apply to any…”
State of Tennessee v. Stokely J.U. Way (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004). · cites it 16× “The State relied upon Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-614 which states that evidentiary privileges are inapplicable to child abuse cases.”
John F. Pinkard, M.D. v. HCA Health Servs. of Tennessee, Inc. D/B/A Summit Med. Ctr., 545 S.W.3d 443 (2017). “§ 33-3-206 (threats of bodily harm); Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-614 (sexual abuse); see Kirchner v.”
State of Tennessee v. Jeremy Curtis Workman (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “T.C.A. § 37-1-614 (2010). At Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-602(a)(3), child sexual abuse is defined extensively.”
State v. Michael D. Keen (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-614 (1996). As set forth above, however, H.”
State v. Chesley Randell Thompson (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-614 (1997). A creation of the legislature, the privilege is undoubtedly subject to limitation or removal as the legislature deems appropriate.”
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.