Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-101 (2026)
Agreements in restraint of trade
✓ current as of May 2026
All arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations made with a view to lessen, or which tend to lessen, full and free competition in trade or commerce affecting this state, and all arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations designed or which tend to advance, reduce, or control the price or the cost to the producer or the consumer of any product or service in trade or commerce affecting this state, are declared to be against public policy, unlawful, and void.
Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 776,s 1, eff. 4/23/2024.
Acts 1891, ch. 218, § 1; 1903, ch. 140, § 1; Shan., § 3185; Code 1932, § 5880; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 69-101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 67
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: Freeman Indus., LLC v. Eastman Chem. Co., 172 S.W.3d 512 (Tenn. 2005).
Freeman Indus., LLC v. Eastman Chem. Co., 172 S.W.3d 512 (Tenn. 2005). “Freeman, as an indirect purchaser of sorbates, filed a lawsuit against the defendants claiming a violation of the Tennessee Trade Practices Act (“TTPA”), Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-25-101 et seq. (2001), and unjust enrichment.”
Jo Ann Forman, Inc. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., Inc., 13 S.W.3d 365 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-101 (1995). Any person who is injured or damaged by any such arrangement, contract, agreement, trust, or combination described in this part may sue for and recover, in any court of competent jurisdiction, from any person operating such trust or…”
Leggett v. Duke Energy Corp., 308 S.W.3d 843 (Tenn. 2010). “The Tennessee Trade Practices Act The Tennessee Trade Practices Act (“TTPA”), Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 47-25-101 to -112 (2001), is a general antitrust statute establishing that various anticompetitive practices are “against public policy, unlawful, and void” in the State of Tennessee.”
Bennett v. Visa U.S.A. Inc., 198 S.W.3d 747 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). “The Act provides: All arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations made with a view to lessen, or which tend to lessen, full and free competition in the importation or sale of articles imported into this state, or in the…”
In re Lipitor Antitrust Litig., 336 F. Supp. 3d 395 (D.N.J. 2018). “Law § 340 (1) ; Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-101 , -102. The Kansas Monopolies and Unfair Trade Act proscribes "all arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons made with a view or which tend to prevent full and free competition" and those "designed…”
Bloom v. Gen. Elec. Supply Co., 702 F. Supp. 1364 (M.D. Tenn. 1988). “T.C.A. § 47-25-101. IV. TEST FOR USING THE PUBLIC POLICY EXCEPTION The Tennessee Courts have yet to articulate a specific test for deciding when to apply the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine.”
State v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 18 S.W.3d 186 (Tenn. 2000). “, the Tennessee Trade Practices Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-25-101, et seq., and a claim for unjust enrichment.”
In re Epipen, 336 F. Supp. 3d 1256 (D. Kan. 2018). “For Tennessee, the class plaintiffs assert their state antitrust claims under the Tennessee Trade Practices Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-101 . Class Compl.”
In re Linerboard Antitrust Litig., 223 F.R.D. 335 (E.D. Pa. 2004). “Tennessee Tennessee applies its general three year statute of limitations to claims under the Tennessee Trade Practices Act (Tenn.Code § 47-25-101 et seq.). See Tenn.”
Freeman Indus. LLC v. Eastman Chem. Co., 227 S.W.3d 561 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). “In its First Amended Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”), Freeman asserted two claims against the Defendants: 1) unjust enrichment; and 2) violation of the Tennessee Trade Practices Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-25-101, et seq. (2001).”
Owens v. Bristol Motor Speedway, Inc., 77 S.W.3d 771 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “On February 19, 1999, the plaintiff filed this action alleging that the defendant, Bristol Speedway, engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy with vendors 1 who sold souvenirs at the defendant’s racetrack in violation of the so-called Trade Practices Act, T.C.A. § 47-25-101, et…”
In re Effexor Antitrust Litig., 357 F. Supp. 3d 363 (D.N.J. 2018). “Law § 340 (1) ; Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-101 ,-102. The Kansas Monopolies and Unfair Trade Act proscribes "all arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons made with a view or which tend to prevent full and free competition" and those "designed or…”
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.