Tenn. Code Ann. » Tenn. Code / Title 4 / Chapter 5 / Part 2
Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-216 (2026)

Invalidity of improperly adopted rules

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

Any agency rule not adopted in compliance with this chapter shall be void and of no effect and shall not be effective against any person or party nor shall it be invoked by the agency for any purpose.

Acts 1982, ch. 874, § 25.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-216 . COUNT FOURTEEN 93.”
Mandela v. Campbell, 978 S.W.2d 531 (Tenn. 1998). · cites it 2× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-216. The appellants argue that the TDOC’s procedures governing disciplinary proceedings must be within the ambit of the UAPA simply because Tenn.”
The Chattanooga-Hamilton Cnty. Hosp. Auth. v. Div. of TennCare (Tenn. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-216 . TennCare does not dispute that it failed to cite the State DRA in the relevant filings.”
Emergency Med. Care Facilities, P.C. v. Div. Of Tenncare (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-216 . The term “rule” 4 is a statutorily defined term under the UAPA meaning an “agency statement of general applicability that implements or prescribes law or policy[5] or describes the procedures or practice requirements of any agency.”
Occupy Nashville v. Haslam, 949 F. Supp. 2d 777 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “2d at 533 (citing Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-216); see also Tenn.”
State of Tennessee v. Brandon Lloyd Russell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “The State acknowledges that Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-216 states that “rules improperly adopted under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA) have no legal affect[.”
Bethel Univ. v. Tennessee State Bd. of Educ. (2018). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-216 . In contrast, the UAPA imposes no such requirement on an agency’s ability to create and adopt policies.”
Peggy Boles v. Dept. of Corr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 4-5-216 and -225(c). The UAPA defines “rule” as 3 On appeal, Ms.”
John Doe, Joe & Jane Doe v. State of Tennessee, Dept. of Child.'s Servs. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “3 actually rules and regulations that have been promulgated in violation of TCA 4-5-216? 10. Are there basic jurisdictional problems in the DCS proceeding against John Doe? 11.”
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.