Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-101 (2026)
Short title
✓ current as of May 2026
This part shall be known and may be cited as the "Contractors Licensing Act of 1994."
Acts 1976, ch. 822, § 1; T.C.A., § 62-601; Acts 1994, ch. 986, § 17.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: Beacon4, LLC v. I & L Investments, LLC, 514 S.W.3d 153 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016).
Beacon4, LLC v. I & L Investments, LLC, 514 S.W.3d 153 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “75 but otherwise asserted affirmative defenses, including, inter alia, that Beacon4 had willfully and grossly exaggerated the lien claim and had violated the Tennessee Contractor’s Licensing Act of 1994, see Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 62-6-101 to 62-6-521, by dividing the Project into…”
Wiltcher v. Bradley, 708 S.W.2d 407 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985). “For answer to the cross claim the Wiltch-ers, among other defenses, said the contract between the parties exceeded $50,000 and Bradley was in violation of T.C.A. § 62-6-101, et seq., in that he did not have a contractor’s license as required by the statute.”
Brandon v. Wright, 838 S.W.2d 532 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992). “orporation denies the completion of the contract and the alleged amount due; and, as an affirmative defense, the answer asserts: Defendants would state as an affirmative defense that Plaintiffs did in fact perpetrate a fraud upon them by contracting to do construction work as a…”
State of Tennessee, on Relation of v. Calvin Howell v. Jimmy Farris, 562 S.W.3d 432 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “Howell was not a licensed contractor pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 62-6-101 et seq. (the “Contractor Licensing Act”), and Mr.”
Warbington Constr., Inc. v. Franklin Landmark, L.L.C., 66 S.W.3d 853 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Due to our holding on the above issues, we find it unnecessary to address the parties’ remaining issues. Conclusion Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court below.”
State of Tennessee v. Virgil Calvin Howell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014). “, §§62-6-101, et seq. (“CLA”), the terms “construction manager” and “construction consultant” are not defined.”
Anchor Pipe Co., Inc. v. Sweeney-Bronze Dev., LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “We are presented with a question of law: whether a contractor who contracts for work above the monetary limit applicable to his license is an unlicensed contractor for purposes of the Contractors Licensing Act of 1994, Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-101 et seq. This act requires persons…”
Guy Varnadoe v. Shelton McGhee Jr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Section 62-6-101 et seq. of the Tennessee Code (“the Contractors Licensing Act”) covers licensing requirements of general contractors.”
Cecil McNatt v. Jane Vestal (Kanizar) Henderson Villa Inc. v. Cecil McNatt (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “1 See Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-101 et seq. 2 See Tennessee Code Annotated Section 47-18-101 et seq.”
Clarksville Towers, LLC v. John Straussberger (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). “; and the Tennessee Contractors Licensing Act, codified at Tennessee Code Annotated § 62-6-101, et seq. On January 9, 2020, Clarksville Towers filed an amended complaint, naming only Mr.”
Lou Ann Zelenik v. Crowell Homebuilding, LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2025). “Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 62-6-101 to -139 (2019 & Supp.”
BF 3 Rivers JD SPV, LLC & Bioferm Energy Sys., LLC v. Lynchburg Renewable Fuels, LLC & 3 Rivers Energy Partners, LLC; Lynchburg Renewable Fuels, LLC v. Bioferm Energy Sys., LLC, et al. (E.D. Tenn. 2025). “50] In their Motion to Dismiss, Defendants argue that each of Plaintiffs’ claims fail because BIOFerm was an unlicensed contractor when it entered the Contract and, therefore, is precluded from recovering under Tennessee’s Contractor’s Licensing Act of 1994, Tenn. Code Ann. §…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-101(3)(A) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Virgil Calvin Howell (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014). “, §§62-6-101, et seq. (“CLA”), the terms “construction manager” and “construction consultant” are not defined.”
Guy Varnadoe v. Shelton McGhee Jr. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Section 62-6-101 et seq. of the Tennessee Code (“the Contractors Licensing Act”) covers licensing requirements of general contractors.”
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.