Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (2026)
Declaratory orders
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency. The agency shall:
- (1) Convene a contested case hearing pursuant to this chapter and issue a declaratory order, which shall be subject to review in the chancery court of Davidson County, unless otherwise specifically provided by statute, in the manner provided for the review of decisions in contested cases; or
- (2) Refuse to issue a declaratory order, in which event the person petitioning the agency for a declaratory order may apply for a declaratory judgment as provided in § 4-5-225.
- (b) A declaratory order shall be binding between the agency and parties on the state of facts alleged in the petition unless it is altered or set aside by the agency or a court in a proper proceeding.
- (c) If an agency has not set a petition for a declaratory order for a contested case hearing within sixty (60) days after receipt of the petition, the agency shall be deemed to have denied the petition and to have refused to issue a declaratory order.
- (d) Each agency shall prescribe by rule the form of such petitions and the procedure for their submission, consideration and disposition.
Acts 1982, ch. 874, § 34.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: E. Ron Pickard v. Tennessee Water Quality Control Bd., 424 S.W.3d 511 (Tenn. 2013).
E. Ron Pickard v. Tennessee Water Quality Control Bd., 424 S.W.3d 511 (Tenn. 2013). “In the absence of a statutory remedy, third parties affected by the Commissioner’s decision to issue a permit sought relief either by requesting a declaratory order from the Board in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 or by filing a pollution complaint under Tenn.”
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a) (“Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency.”
Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827 (Tenn. 2008). “See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 4-5-223 to -225 (2005 & Supp.”
Hughley v. State, 208 S.W.3d 388 (Tenn. 2006). “We hold that, where an agency is petitioned to issue a declaratory order pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-223 and the agency declines to convene a contested case hearing and issue the declaratory order, the petitioner is not subject to the sixty-day statute of…”
Richardson v. Tennessee Bd. of Dentistry, 913 S.W.2d 446 (Tenn. 1995). “3 See Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 4-5-223 — 24 (1991 Repl.”
Hickman v. Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, 78 S.W.3d 285 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Hickman’s letter to the Board’s chairman could reasonably be construed as a petition for declaratory order in accordance with Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (1998) which could provide the necessary predicate for a petition for declaratory judgment under Tenn.”
Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 . 48 On appeal, Nunn added very little to this allegation.”
Bobbitt v. Shell, 115 S.W.3d 506 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “3 On March 5, 1998, Appellants petitioned Eleanor Yoa-kum, the Personnel Commissioner at the time, for a Declaratory Order pursuant to T.C.A. § 4-5-223. 4 Due to a clerical error, *509 the Petition for Declaratory Order was not heard within the sixty (60) day time limit.”
Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “[1] Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (a)(1) a "contested case" merely provides an alternative procedure for an administrative review of an agency proceeding.”
Rhoden v. State Dep't of Corr., 984 S.W.2d 955 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “But giving him the benefit of the doubt, the proper procedure for attacking a rule of the Department is set out in Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 . Tenn.Code Ann.”
BellSouth Telecomm., Inc. v. Greer, 972 S.W.2d 663 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “On September 12, 1995, the company filed a petition for a declaratory order pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (a) (1991) questioning the staff's authority to recommend adjustments to its corrected Form PSC-3.”
Tennessee Env't Council, Inc. v. Tennessee Water Quality Control Bd., 254 S.W.3d 396 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The petition, which was in letter form, reads as follows: Dear Sirs: The Tennessee Environmental Council submits this complaint regarding the issuance of a NPDES permit (TN0077755) for Tosh Farms in Huntland, TN, and petitions the Water Quality Control Board for a declaratory…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a) — 19 cases
Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Morgan, 263 S.W.3d 827 (Tenn. 2008). “See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 4-5-223 to -225 (2005 & Supp.”
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a) (“Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency.”
BellSouth Telecomm., Inc. v. Greer, 972 S.W.2d 663 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). “On September 12, 1995, the company filed a petition for a declaratory order pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (a) (1991) questioning the staff's authority to recommend adjustments to its corrected Form PSC-3.”
E. Ron Pickard v. Tennessee Water Quality Control Bd., 424 S.W.3d 511 (Tenn. 2013). “In the absence of a statutory remedy, third parties affected by the Commissioner’s decision to issue a permit sought relief either by requesting a declaratory order from the Board in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 or by filing a pollution complaint under Tenn.”
Rhoden v. State Dep't of Corr., 984 S.W.2d 955 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “But giving him the benefit of the doubt, the proper procedure for attacking a rule of the Department is set out in Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 . Tenn.Code Ann.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a)(1) — 5 cases
Richardson v. Tennessee Bd. of Dentistry, 913 S.W.2d 446 (Tenn. 1995). “3 See Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 4-5-223 — 24 (1991 Repl.”
Milcrofton Util. Dist. Of Williamson Cnty., Tennessee v. Non Potable Well Water, Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019).
Erin R. Knight v. Tennessee State Bd. Of Educ. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021).
Bee Deselm v. Tennessee Peace Officers Standards & Training Comm'n (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010).
Morris v. Corr. Enter. of TN. (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a)(2) — 10 cases
Hughley v. State, 208 S.W.3d 388 (Tenn. 2006). “We hold that, where an agency is petitioned to issue a declaratory order pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-223 and the agency declines to convene a contested case hearing and issue the declaratory order, the petitioner is not subject to the sixty-day statute of…”
Danny A. Stewart v. Derrick D. Schofield, Comm'r, Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 368 S.W.3d 457 (Tenn. 2012). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a) (“Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency.”
Richardson v. Tennessee Bd. of Dentistry, 913 S.W.2d 446 (Tenn. 1995). “3 See Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 4-5-223 — 24 (1991 Repl.”
Craig Robert Nunn v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 547 S.W.3d 163 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 . 48 On appeal, Nunn added very little to this allegation.”
Rhoden v. State Dep't of Corr., 984 S.W.2d 955 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “But giving him the benefit of the doubt, the proper procedure for attacking a rule of the Department is set out in Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 . Tenn.Code Ann.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223(a)(l) — 4 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. § 4-5-223(a) (“Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency.”
Hughley v. State, 208 S.W.3d 388 (Tenn. 2006). “We hold that, where an agency is petitioned to issue a declaratory order pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-223 and the agency declines to convene a contested case hearing and issue the declaratory order, the petitioner is not subject to the sixty-day statute of…”
Bishop v. Conley, 894 S.W.2d 294 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). “[1] Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (a)(1) a "contested case" merely provides an alternative procedure for an administrative review of an agency proceeding.”
Moody v. State Dist. Pub. Defenders Conf., 980 S.W.2d 385 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223(c) — 10 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. § 4-5-223(a) (“Any affected person may petition an agency for a declaratory order as to the validity or applicability of a statute, rule or order within the primary jurisdiction of the agency.”
E. Ron Pickard v. Tennessee Water Quality Control Bd., 424 S.W.3d 511 (Tenn. 2013). “In the absence of a statutory remedy, third parties affected by the Commissioner’s decision to issue a permit sought relief either by requesting a declaratory order from the Board in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-5-223 or by filing a pollution complaint under Tenn.”
Hickman v. Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, 78 S.W.3d 285 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Hickman’s letter to the Board’s chairman could reasonably be construed as a petition for declaratory order in accordance with Tenn.Code Ann. § 4-5-223 (1998) which could provide the necessary predicate for a petition for declaratory judgment under Tenn.”
Hughley v. State, 208 S.W.3d 388 (Tenn. 2006). “We hold that, where an agency is petitioned to issue a declaratory order pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-223 and the agency declines to convene a contested case hearing and issue the declaratory order, the petitioner is not subject to the sixty-day statute of…”
Davis v. Sundquist, 947 S.W.2d 155 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).
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.