Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 (2026)
Privileged communications
✓ current as of May 2026
For the purpose of this chapter, the confidential relations and communications between licensed psychologist, licensed psychological examiner, licensed senior psychological examiner, certified psychological assistant, or certified psychological testing technician and client are placed upon the same basis as those provided by law between attorney and client; and nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require any such privileged communication to be disclosed.
Amended by 2023 Tenn. Acts, ch. 442, s 14, eff. 1/1/2024.
Acts 1953, ch. 169, § 17 (Williams, § 7082.17); T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 63-1117; Acts 2001, ch. 123, § 22.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Hannah Ann Culbertson v. Randall Eric Culbertson, 455 S.W.3d 107 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014).
Hannah Ann Culbertson v. Randall Eric Culbertson, 455 S.W.3d 107 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 (2010). -4- She cited Rule 703 of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence3 and argued that, if the trial court can access the data and information underlying Dr.”
Billy Overstreet v. TRW Com. Steering Div., 256 S.W.3d 626 (Tenn. 2008). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 (2007). Instead of “privilege,” the statutes cited by the concurrence note that patients have an “expectation of and right to privacy.”
Hannah Ann Culbertson v. Randall Eric Culbertson, 393 S.W.3d 678 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “Discussion Husband argues that the trial court erred in granting Wife’s Motion for Release of Psychological Records because his psychological records are protected from discovery by the psychologist-client privilege under Tennessee Code Annotated section 63-11-213. On the other…”
State v. Thompson, 768 S.W.2d 239 (Tenn. 1989). “We also hold the statutory privilege, T.C.A. § 63-11-213, was waived. We further find no reversible error in the State’s cross-examination of Defendant’s witnesses in the sentencing hearing.”
Kirchner v. Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc., 184 F.R.D. 124 (M.D. Tenn. 1998). “Tennessee law also provides that confidential relations and communications between licensed psychologists and their clients and between social workers and their clients are placed upon the same basis as those provided by law between attorney and client.”
Mathews v. Becerra, 455 P.3d 277 (Cal. 2019). “§ 5944 ; Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 ; Wn. Rev. Code Ann.”
Kalenevitch v. Finger, 595 A.2d 1224 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991). “4507 (McKinney 1984); Tenn.Code Ann. § 63-11-213 (1953); Wash.Rev.”
Weisbeck v. Hess, 524 N.W.2d 363 (S.D. 1994). “1993); TennCode Ann. § 63-11-213 (1990). . GaCode Ann.”
In Re Lucas H. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). “Here, in its order, the juvenile court expressly found that “if Supreme Court Rule 40 was limited by the applications of the privilege in T.C.A. 63-11-213, it would have said so.” It also held that “Supreme Court Rule 40 [does not require] that any limitations be placed on the…”
John F. Pinkard, M.D. v. HCA Health Servs. of Tennessee, Inc. D/B/A Summit Med. Ctr., 545 S.W.3d 443 (2017). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 . Like the attorney-client and spousal communication privilege, the client and the patient are the holders of both privileges and the privileges are waivable by the holders.”
Outpost Solar, LLC v. Henry, Henry, & Underwood, P.C. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “We first noted that the statute which created the psychologist-client privilege, Tennessee Code Annotated section 63-11-213, put the privilege on par with the attorney- 10 Culbertson II set forth the following standard of review of trial court decisions involving waiver of the…”
Jennifer Benke Bottorff v. Christian Todd Bottorff (Tenn. Ct. App. 2020). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-11-213 (2017) (“For the purpose of this chapter, the confidential relations and communications between licensed psychologist or psychological examiner or senior psychological examiner or certified psychological assistant and client are placed upon the…”
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.