Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-47-114 (2026)
Summons - Time to answer
✓ current as of May 2026
Upon the filing of the complaint or petition for the writ of ouster, a summons shall issue for the defendant, and there shall accompany the summons and be served upon the defendant a copy of the complaint or petition filed against the defendant, and the defendant shall have the right to answer within twenty (20) days from such service.
Acts 1915, ch. 11, § 6; Shan., § 1135a10; Acts 1919, ch. 161, § 1; Code 1932, § 1886; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 8-2714.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Jones v. Looper, 86 S.W.3d 189 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000).
State Ex Rel. Jones v. Looper, 86 S.W.3d 189 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “§ 8-47-115 , and the provision shortening the normal time for answering, see Tenn.Code Ann. § 8-47-114. The provision establishing the time to answer states: Upon the filing of the complaint or petition for the writ of ouster, a summons shall issue for the defendant, and there…”
The Commissioners of the Powell-Clinch Util. Dist. v. Util. Mgmt. Review Bd., 427 S.W.3d 375 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 8-47-114, 8-47-115. Continuances of the trial by agreement of the parties is expressly prohibited.”
State Ex Rel. Carney v. Crosby, 255 S.W.3d 593 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “Thus, the General Assembly provided that the defendant would have only twenty days to answer the petition, Tenn.Code Ann. § 8-47-114, and the petition and answer are the only pleadings allowed.”
State of Tennessee Ex Rel Landle Byrge v. Nicholas Jay Yeager, 472 S.W.3d 657 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 8-47-114, 8-47-115, 8-47119.”
State of Tennessee, ex rel., Marlinee Iverson, Cnty. Attorney for Shelby Cnty., Tennessee v. Wanda Halbert (Tenn. Ct. App. 2025). “Whether the trial court erred in denying Appellant’s motion for default judgment when Appellee failed to timely answer under Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-47-114 and there was not a finding of excusable neglect.”
State v. Looper (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “Particularly relevant to the question before us are the limitation of allowable pleadings to the petition or complaint and an answer, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-47-115 , and the provision shortening the normal time for answering, see Tenn.”
First Union Nat'l Bank v. Donald Abercrombie (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-47-114 (2002). Second, the defendant in Looper did not respond in any way to the ouster complaint until literally ten minutes before the hearing.”
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.