Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106 (2026)
Application
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) This chapter shall not apply to the military, the governor, the general assembly, the state building commission, the state funding board or the courts, nor shall it apply to county and municipal boards, commissions, committees, departments or officers.
- (b) Disciplinary and job termination proceedings for inmates under the supervision of the department of correction or juveniles under the supervision of the department of children's services shall not be considered "contested cases" as defined by § 4-5-102.
- (c) Sections 4-5-105, 4-5-219, 4-5-223, 4-5-225 and 4-5-301 - 4-5-323 shall not apply to the board of claims, the state election commission or the board of parole.
- (d) The rulemaking and publication provisions of this chapter shall not apply to proclamations promulgated under title 70, and the promulgation, filing and publication provisions of such title shall control, except that the secretary of state shall publish on the administrative register website current and effective proclamations in the same manner that rules and other notices are published under § 4-5-220. The text of proclamations shall be published on the administrative register website under the proclamation section and shall have the same weight and effect prescribed in § 4-5-221(c), for the text of rules so published. The wildlife resources agency shall keep an original copy of all proclamations from which the effective dates of all proclamations can be determined.
- (e) Sections 4-5-303, 4-5-309, 4-5-311(a), (b) and (c), 4-5-312(c), 4-5-314(b), 4-5-315 - 4-5-318, 4-5-322 and 4-5-323, shall not apply to the department administering the Tennessee Employment Security Law, compiled in title 50, chapter 7.
- (f) This chapter shall not apply to revenue rulings and letter rulings issued by the commissioner of revenue.
Acts 1975, ch. 370, § 2; 1976, ch. 685, § 1; 1977, ch. 467, § 1; 1978, ch. 938, § 17; T.C.A., §§ 4-529, 4-5-123; Acts 1982, ch. 874, § 5; 1983, ch. 103, § 1; 1988, ch. 562, § 2; 1989, ch. 278, § 21; 1989, ch. 454, § 3; 1996, ch. 1079, § 16; 1998, ch. 1049, § 1; 1999, ch. 520, § 26; 2000, ch. 864, § 1; 2007 , ch. 183, § 1; 2009 , ch. 566, §§ 2, 3.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2021 · leading case: Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “Section 4-5-106(b) states: (b) Disciplinary and job termination proceedings for prisoners under the supervision of the department of correction or juveniles under the supervision of the department of youth development shall not be considered "contested cases" as that term is…”
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c). Rather, the petition for common law writ of certiorari is the procedural vehicle for bringing such challenges.”
Mandela v. Campbell, 978 S.W.2d 531 (Tenn. 1998). “The appellants argue that the TDOC’s procedures governing disciplinary proceedings must be within the ambit of the UAPA simply because Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(b) explicitly prohibits review of disciplinary decisions under the UAPA.”
Mid-South Indoor Horse Racing, Inc. v. Tennessee State Racing Comm'n, 798 S.W.2d 531 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990). “§ 4-5-102 are extremely broad and are modified by specific exceptions in Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106. Relying on these broad definitions, the Tennessee Supreme Court has held that the General Assembly’s intent to make the UAPA generally applicable is “unmistakably clear.”
Hickman v. Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, 78 S.W.3d 285 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “However, Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c) (2000) explicitly excludes the Board from the provisions of Tenn.”
Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “Nunn did not proceed under this section in his original complaint, nor did he petition the Board of Probation and Parole for a declaratory order, because Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-106(c) provides that section 4-5-225 “shall not apply to .”
Bonner v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 84 S.W.3d 576 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “§ 4-5-322 could not be considered because this was not a “contested case” pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106 (b); and 3) the petitioner erroneously claimed that the 30% extension of his release eligibility should have been calculated on only one of his sentences when,…”
Brigham v. Lack, 755 S.W.2d 469 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). “…30, 1986. 2 . The Board of Paroles is exempt from sections 4-5-223 and —224 of the Administrative Procedures Act. T.C.A. § 4-5-106(c).”
Massey v. Shelby Cnty. Ret. Bd., 813 S.W.2d 462 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “T.C.A. § 4-5-106(a) provides: “The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to .”
Winslow Watson v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, CCA, & Jody Benjamin, 970 S.W.2d 494 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c). Thus, Petitioner can not bring a declaratory judgment action against TBP under either the UAPA or the Declaratory Judgment Act.”
Slagle v. Reynolds, 845 S.W.2d 167 (Tenn. 1992). “T.C.A. § 4-5-106(a), (b). T.C.A. § 4-5-323 states that “[a]n aggrieved party may obtain a review of any final judgment of the chancery court .”
Alabama Cellular Serv., Inc. v. Sizemore, 565 So. 2d 199 (Ala. 1990). “The genesis of § 41-22-10 is Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106 (1979 Replacement); the genesis of § 41-22-11 is Tenn.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106(a) — 5 cases
Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “Section 4-5-106(b) states: (b) Disciplinary and job termination proceedings for prisoners under the supervision of the department of correction or juveniles under the supervision of the department of youth development shall not be considered "contested cases" as that term is…”
Massey v. Shelby Cnty. Ret. Bd., 813 S.W.2d 462 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “T.C.A. § 4-5-106(a) provides: “The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to .”
Slagle v. Reynolds, 845 S.W.2d 167 (Tenn. 1992). “T.C.A. § 4-5-106(a), (b). T.C.A. § 4-5-323 states that “[a]n aggrieved party may obtain a review of any final judgment of the chancery court .”
Sherrie L. Durham v. Bill Haslam (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016).
Roy L. Tidwell v. City of Memphis (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106(b) — 3 cases
Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “Section 4-5-106(b) states: (b) Disciplinary and job termination proceedings for prisoners under the supervision of the department of correction or juveniles under the supervision of the department of youth development shall not be considered "contested cases" as that term is…”
Mandela v. Campbell, 978 S.W.2d 531 (Tenn. 1998). “The appellants argue that the TDOC’s procedures governing disciplinary proceedings must be within the ambit of the UAPA simply because Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(b) explicitly prohibits review of disciplinary decisions under the UAPA.”
Wilson v. So. Centr. Corr. Facility Disciplinary Bd (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c) — 9 cases
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c). Rather, the petition for common law writ of certiorari is the procedural vehicle for bringing such challenges.”
Hickman v. Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, 78 S.W.3d 285 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “However, Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c) (2000) explicitly excludes the Board from the provisions of Tenn.”
Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “Nunn did not proceed under this section in his original complaint, nor did he petition the Board of Probation and Parole for a declaratory order, because Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-106(c) provides that section 4-5-225 “shall not apply to .”
Brigham v. Lack, 755 S.W.2d 469 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). “…30, 1986. 2 . The Board of Paroles is exempt from sections 4-5-223 and —224 of the Administrative Procedures Act. T.C.A. § 4-5-106(c).”
Winslow Watson v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, CCA, & Jody Benjamin, 970 S.W.2d 494 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-106(c). Thus, Petitioner can not bring a declaratory judgment action against TBP under either the UAPA or the Declaratory Judgment Act.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-106(d) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Brandon Lloyd Russell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012).
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.