Tenn. Code Ann. » Tenn. Code / Title 47 / Chapter 50
Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-103 (2026)

Written contracts prima facie evidence of consideration

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

All contracts in writing signed by the party to be bound, or the party's authorized agent and attorney, are prima facie evidence of a consideration.

Code 1858, §1805; Shan., § 3214; Code 1932, § 7829; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), §§ 47-1702, 47-15-103.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: In Re Est. of Ina Ruth Brown, 402 S.W.3d 193 (Tenn. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Est. of Ina Ruth Brown, 402 S.W.3d 193 (Tenn. 2013). · cites it 4× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-103 (2001). Thus, the party claiming a lack of consideration for a validly executed contract has the burden of overcoming this presumption.”
Pyburn v. Bill Heard Chevrolet, 63 S.W.3d 351 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “” T.C.A. § 47-50-103. The burden of overcoming this presumption of consideration in a validly executed contract is upon the party asserting a lack of consideration.”
Pinney v. Tarpley, 686 S.W.2d 574 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 3× “TCA § 47-50-103. The want of consideration may be shown as a defense in an action on a contract between the parties.”
Buraczynski v. Eyring, 919 S.W.2d 314 (Tenn. 1996). · cites it 2× “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-50-103 (1995); Rodgers v.”
Atkins v. Kirkpatrick, 823 S.W.2d 547 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “T.C.A. § 47-50-103. The burden of overcoming the presumption of consideration in a validly executed contract is upon the party asserting lack of consideration.”
Brubaker v. Barrett, 801 F. Supp. 2d 743 (E.D. Tenn. 2011). · cites it 2× “” T.C.A. § 47-50-103. The Arbitration Form — which was located on a separate page from the rest of the Arbitration Agreement — stated the following: I agree that, in the event that I have any employment related legal claims, I will submit them to final and binding neutral…”
Joyner v. Johnson (In Re Johnson), 187 B.R. 598 (E.D. Tenn. 1994). · cites it 2× “” T.C.A. § 47-50-103. This court’s rulings stated above render it unnecessary to address the bank’s additional argument that Ms.”
Holt v. Wilmoth, 336 S.W.3d 234 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 47-50-104 (2001)(recognizing “want or failure” of consideration as a defense), with Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-50-103 (2001)(recognizing a presumption of consideration to support any written contract); see also Pyburn v.”
Shawn Thacker v. Sheila Marie Wilbanks (Tenn. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-103 ; Cumberland Properties, LLC v.”
Kim Renae Nelson v. Loring E. Just. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-103 ; Cumberland Properties, LLC v.”
Pugh v. Lady Jane's Haircuts for Men Holding Co., LLC (M.D. Tenn. 2023). · cites it 2× “2011) (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-103 ). Thus, “in the absence of fraud[,] [a]n individual who signs a contract is presumed to have read the contract and is bound by its contents.”
Condon v. Vanderbilt Univ. Med. Ctr. (M.D. Tenn. 2023). · cites it 2× “2001); T.C.A. § 47-50-103 10 Defendant and Plaintiff do not appear to dispute that Tennessee law applies to the interpretation of the Agreement.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
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.