Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (2026)
Grounds for denial, revocation or suspension of certificate or license
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a)
- (1) The board has the power to deny, revoke or suspend any certificate or license to practice nursing or to otherwise discipline a licensee upon proof that the person:
- (A) Is guilty of fraud or deceit in procuring or attempting to procure a license to practice nursing;
- (B) Is guilty of a crime;
- (C) Is unfit or incompetent by reason of negligence, habits or other cause;
- (D) Is addicted to alcohol or drugs to the degree of interfering with nursing duties;
- (E) Is mentally incompetent;
- (F) Is guilty of unprofessional conduct; or
- (G) Has violated or attempted to violate, directly or indirectly, or assisted in or abetted the violation of or conspired to violate any provision of this chapter or any lawful order of the board issued pursuant thereto.
- (2) This section shall also apply to members of the board.
- (1) The board has the power to deny, revoke or suspend any certificate or license to practice nursing or to otherwise discipline a licensee upon proof that the person:
- (b) The board shall have concurrent enforcement power, pursuant to [former] § 63-1-122 [repealed], with the division to revoke or suspend any certificate of fitness of a nurse practitioner who has been issued a certificate of fitness pursuant to § 63-1-104 or to otherwise discipline such person in accordance with this section.
- (c)
- (1) The board may utilize one (1) or more screening panels in its investigative and disciplinary process to assure that complaints filed and investigations conducted are meritorious and to act as a mechanism for diversion to professional peer review organizations and/or impaired professionals associations or foundations those cases that the board, through established guidelines, deems appropriate. Upon diversion, such entities shall retain the same immunity as provided by law for the board.
- (2) The screening panels shall consist of as many members as the board directs, but shall include at least one (1) but no more than three (3) licensed nurses, who may be members of the board or may serve either voluntarily or through employment by or under contract with the board.
- (3) The activities of the screening panels and any mediation or arbitration sessions shall not be construed as meetings of an agency for purposes of the open meetings law, compiled in title 8, chapter 44, and shall remain confidential. The members of the screening panels, mediators and arbitrators have a deliberative privilege and the same immunity as provided by law for the board and are not subject to deposition or subpoena to testify regarding any matter or issue raised in any contested case, criminal prosecution or civil lawsuit that may result from or be incident to cases processed before them.
- (d) The board retains jurisdiction to modify or refuse to modify, upon request of any party, any of its orders issued pursuant to this section in compliance with procedures established by the board. The board, pursuant to duly promulgated rules, may, whenever a final order is issued after a disciplinary contested case hearing that contains findings that a licensee or other person has violated any provision of this chapter, assess the costs directly related to the prosecution of the case against the licensee or person.
- (e) Any elected officer of the board or any duly appointed or elected chair of any panel of the board or any screening panel and any hearing officer, arbitrator or mediator has the authority to administer oaths to witnesses and, upon probable cause being established, issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and records.
Acts 1967, ch. 78, § 24; 1976, ch. 501, § 10; 1980, ch. 851, § 6; T.C.A., § 63-752; Acts 1982, ch. 712, § 8; 1998, ch. 1047, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2007–2023 · leading case: Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007).
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
Lee Med., Inc. v. Paula Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn. 2010). “§ 63-4-118 (2004) (chiropractors); Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (c)(3) (2004) (nurses); Tenn.”
Jack Wayne Butler v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1) (discussed in detail, infra).”
Catherine J. Hollahan v. Tennessee Dep't of Health (2017). “The facts enumerated in paragraphs three (3), four (4), and nine (9) constitute a violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1): (C) Is unfit or incompetent by reason of negligence, habits or other cause.”
Christin M. Johnson, LPN v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “The Board is authorized by Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 to discipline individuals licensed to practice nursing in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, Tenn.”
Christina K. Collins v. Tennessee Dep't of Health (2023). “Collins was “unfit or incompetent by reason of negligence, habits or other cause” in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(C); “guilty of unprofessional conduct” in violation of Tenn.”
Shahnaz Poursaied v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (2021). “Poursaied violated Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(F), which authorizes the Board to discipline a nurse upon proof of unprofessional conduct; and (3) revocation was the appropriate disciplinary action.”
Sandi D. Jackson v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “13(w) “Engaging in acts of dishonesty which relate to the practice of nursing[;]” or Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(F) “unprofessional conduct[.”
Tennessee Dep't of Health v. Christina K. Collins, RN, APRN (2020). “19; Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 63-7-115 (a) (1) and (b); 63-7-207(10).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a) — 1 case
Jack Wayne Butler v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1) (discussed in detail, infra).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(1)(A) — 1 case
Jack Wayne Butler v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1) (discussed in detail, infra).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(1)(B) — 2 cases
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
Jack Wayne Butler v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1) (discussed in detail, infra).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(1)(E) — 1 case
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(1)(F) — 1 case
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(l)(B) — 1 case
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(a)(l)(F) — 1 case
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(c)(3) — 1 case
Lee Med., Inc. v. Paula Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn. 2010). “§ 63-4-118 (2004) (chiropractors); Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (c)(3) (2004) (nurses); Tenn.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115(d) — 1 case
Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). “Miller should be disciplined in accordance with *234 Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-7-115 (a)(1)(E) (2004) because she was mentally incompetent.”
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.