Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-3-101 (2026)

Short title

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

This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972."

Acts 1972, ch. 561, § 1; T.C.A., § 50-501.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1986–2012 · leading case: Bellamy v. Fed. Express Corp., 749 S.W.2d 31 (Tenn. 1988).
Bellamy v. Fed. Express Corp., 749 S.W.2d 31 (Tenn. 1988). · cites it 2× “§§ 651 to 678, and regulations issued under the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, T.C.A. §§ 50-3-101 to 50-3-918. The two defendants filed a single answer and have been represented throughout the proceedings by the same counsel.”
Valencia v. Freeland & Lemm Constr. Co., 108 S.W.3d 239 (Tenn. 2003). · cites it 2× “Specifically, Freeland was cited for violations of Tennessee's Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-3-101 (1999).”
Terminix Int'l Co. v. Tennessee Dep't of Labor, 77 S.W.3d 185 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “Following the inspection, TOSHA issued citations 5 against TruGreen alleging various violations of the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972 (“Tennessee OSH Act”), T.C.A. §§ 50-3-101, et seq., including alleged vio *189 lations of certain of TOSHA’s general…”
Carl Wren & Frances Marie Wren, Cross-Appellees v. Sullivan Elec., Inc., Cross-Appellant, 797 F.2d 323 (6th Cir. 1986). “56 as authorized by Tennessee OSH Act of 1972, Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 50-3-101 et seq. . Judge Nelson’s concurring opinion suffers from two important defects on this issue with regard to the testimony of Wren’s employer that he ordered Wren not to enter the building.”
Terminix Int'l Co. v. Dep't of Labor (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “The State of Tennessee enacted the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 50-3-101 et seq. The stated purpose of this Act is: “to assure as far as possible every working man and woman in the state of Tennessee safe and healthful working…”
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Tennessee Dep't of Labor & Workforce Dev. & Workers' Comp. Div. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “§§ 50-6-118 , -415; The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-3-101 et. seq.; Tenn.”
Swift Roofing, Inc. v. State of Tennessee, Comm'r of Labor & Workforce Dev. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “The State of Tennessee enacted the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 50-3-101 et seq., for the purpose of providing “safe and healthful working conditions” for Tennessee workers.”
Mario Valencia, Next of Kin & Heir at Law v. Freeland & Lemm Constr. Co. (Tenn. 2003). · cites it 2× “3 Specifically, Freeland was cited for violations of Tennessee’s Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972, Tennessee Co de Annotated section 50-3-101 (199 9). 2 but that the employer’s conduct was not indicative of an “actual intent” to injure Valencia.”
Odom v. City of Chattanooga (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “In 3 See T.C.A. § 50-3-101, et seq. 4 See C HATTANOOGA , T ENN .”
Harry Luther v. Billy Compton (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “, or the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Act (“TOSHA”), T.C.A. §§ 50-3-101 et seq.. With regard to his cause of action for improper medical care, Luther’s Complaint alleges that the Defendants exhibited a “flagrant deliberate indifference” to his medical condition and…”
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.