Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (2026)
Nonpayment - Notice of intent to seek relief under chapter - Remedies - Attorney's fees - Bond
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a)
- (1) A prime contractor who has not received payment from an owner, or a remote contractor who has not received payment from a prime contractor or other remote contractor, in accordance with this chapter, or any prime contractor or remote contractor that intends to seek to recover funds as permitted by § 66-34-205 and this section, shall notify the party failing to make payment of the notifying party's intent to seek relief against that party as provided in this chapter.
- (2) The notification must be made by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by another commercial delivery service that provides written confirmation of delivery.
- (3) If the notified party does not, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of the notice, make payment or provide to the notifying party a response giving adequate legal reasons for failure of the notified party to make payment, then the notifying party may, in addition to all other remedies available at law or in equity, sue for equitable relief, including injunctive relief, for continuing violations of this chapter in the chancery court of the county in which the real property is located.
- (4) The failure to make the only payment due under the contract may be considered a continuing violation under this chapter.
- (5) The notification required by this part may be sent separately or as part of any notice of nonpayment or other notice required under the contract and may be in substantially the following form:
This letter shall serve as notice pursuant to the Tennessee Prompt Pay Act, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 66-34-101 et seq., of [prime contractor or remote contractor]'s intent to seek relief under the Prompt Pay Act. [Prime contractor or remote contractor] furnished [description of labor, materials, or services furnished] in furtherance of improvements to real property located at [property description] pursuant to its written contract with [lender, owner, prime contractor, or remote contractor]. [Prime contractor or remote contractor] first furnished labor, materials, or services on [insert first date] and ["is still continuing to perform" or "last furnished labor, materials, or services on (insert date)"]. If [owner, prime contractor, and/or remote contractor] fail(s) to make payment, arrange for payment, or provide a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the failure to make payment to [prime contractor or remote contractor] within ten (10) days of your receipt of this letter, then [prime contractor or remote contractor] may, in addition to all other remedies at law or in equity, file a lawsuit for equitable relief, including injunctive relief, for continuing violations of this chapter.
- (b)
- (1) If an owner does not make payment to a prime contractor or furnish a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the owner's failure to make payment within ten (10) days of receipt of the notice required by subsection (a), then the prime contractor may stop work until payment is received or until the owner provides a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the owner's failure to make payment, as long as the prime contractor is not otherwise in default of the written contract. If, in accordance with subsection (a), the owner makes payment or provides a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the failure to pay the prime contractor, then the prime contractor shall not stop work pursuant to this section.
- (2) If a prime contractor does not make payment to a remote contractor or furnish a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the prime contractor's failure to make payment within ten (10) days of receipt of the notice required by subsection (a), then the remote contractor may stop work until payment is received or until the prime contractor provides a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the prime contractor's failure to make payment, as long as the remote contractor is not otherwise in default of the written contract. If, in accordance with subsection (a), the prime contractor makes payment or provides a response setting forth adequate legal reasons for the failure to pay the remote contractor, then the remote contractor shall not stop work pursuant to this section.
- (c) Any work stoppage by a prime contractor or a remote contractor in accordance with this section entitles the prime contractor or remote contractor to an extension of the contract schedule, if any, equal to the length of the work stoppage.
- (d) Reasonable attorney's fees may be awarded against the nonprevailing party if the nonprevailing party acted in bad faith.
- (e) A bond in the amount claimed or ordered to be paid must be filed with good sureties to be approved by the clerk prior to the issuance of any injunctive relief.
Amended by 2020 Tenn. Acts, ch. 749, s 30, eff. 7/1/2020.
Acts 1991, ch. 45, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · 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). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (b) (providing that “[rjeasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded against the nonprevailing party; provided, that such nonprevailing party has acted in bad faith.”
Madden Phillips Constr., Inc. v. GGAT Dev. Corp., 315 S.W.3d 800 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(2) (2004). An owner’s failure to respond within ten days gives rise to claims for equitable relief and attorney’s fees.”
Trinity Indus., Inc. v. McKinnon Bridge Co., 77 S.W.3d 159 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (4)(b). The chancellor denied Trinity’s request for attorney’s fees, finding that McKinnon had not acted in bad faith.”
Eagle Supply & Mfg., L.P. v. Bechtel Jacobs Co., 868 F.3d 423 (6th Cir. 2017). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (b). A party acts in bad faith when it acts with “knowing or reckless disregard for contractual rights or duties.”
Rose Constr. v. Raintree Dev. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 ; see also Wasco, Inc.”
E Solutions For Bldgs., LLC v. Knestrick Contractor, Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (providing that where payment is not made after notice of nonpayment, the notifying party may seek relief in chancery court, where reasonable attorney’s fees “may be awarded against the nonprevailing party”).”
King Constr. Grp., Inc. v. Highlands Residential Servs. (2024). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (d) provides that reasonable attorneys’ fees may be awarded against the non-prevailing party in an action under the PPA if the non-prevailing party acted in bad faith.”
83 Freight, LLC v. C4 Sourcing Solutions, LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2025). “” When a prevailing party has the right to an award of fees under one claim but not others, an award of all fees is appropriate when the claims “involve a common core of 10 The Prompt Pay Act entitles a prevailing party to reasonable attorney’s fees if “the nonprevailing party…”
Aarene Contracting, LLC v. Krispy Kreme Doughnut (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (emphasis added).”
Vic Davis Constr., Inc. v. Lauren Engineers & Constructors, Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (b) (“Reasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded against the nonprevailing party; provided, that such nonprevailing party has acted in bad faith.”
Claiborne Hauling, LLC v. Wisteria Park, LLC (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010). “62, which included attorney fees under the Prompt Pay Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (2004). Wisteria appeals.”
Clarksville Towers, LLC v. John Straussberger (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021). “at __-__,*3-6; see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 . Nevertheless, Clarksville Towers argues that by paying the subcontractors itself, it has stepped into Mr.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(3) — 2 cases
Trinity Indus., Inc. v. McKinnon Bridge Co., 77 S.W.3d 159 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (4)(b). The chancellor denied Trinity’s request for attorney’s fees, finding that McKinnon had not acted in bad faith.”
Trinity Indus., Inc. v. McKinnon Bridge Co., Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a) — 1 case
Beacon4, LLC v. I & L Investments, LLC, 514 S.W.3d 153 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (b) (providing that “[rjeasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded against the nonprevailing party; provided, that such nonprevailing party has acted in bad faith.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(1) — 1 case
Aarene Contracting, LLC v. Krispy Kreme Doughnut (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (emphasis added).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(2) — 1 case
Madden Phillips Constr., Inc. v. GGAT Dev. Corp., 315 S.W.3d 800 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(2) (2004). An owner’s failure to respond within ten days gives rise to claims for equitable relief and attorney’s fees.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(3) — 2 cases
Madden Phillips Constr., Inc. v. GGAT Dev. Corp., 315 S.W.3d 800 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(2) (2004). An owner’s failure to respond within ten days gives rise to claims for equitable relief and attorney’s fees.”
Rose Constr. v. Raintree Dev. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 ; see also Wasco, Inc.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(b) — 3 cases
Beacon4, LLC v. I & L Investments, LLC, 514 S.W.3d 153 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 (b) (providing that “[rjeasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded against the nonprevailing party; provided, that such nonprevailing party has acted in bad faith.”
Madden Phillips Constr., Inc. v. GGAT Dev. Corp., 315 S.W.3d 800 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 66-34-602(a)(2) (2004). An owner’s failure to respond within ten days gives rise to claims for equitable relief and attorney’s fees.”
Rose Constr. v. Raintree Dev. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602 ; see also Wasco, Inc.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-34-602(b)(1991) — 1 case
Sun Splash Painting v. Homestead Vill. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003).
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.