Is a Tennessee General Sessions Court with separate civil and criminal dockets and multiple judges one court or many for the clerk's pay calculation?

Subject

Opinion No. 18-43, Compensation of General Sessions Clerk, September 17, 2018

Plain-English summary

Representative Raumesh Akbari asked whether a General Sessions Court with separate civil and criminal dockets and multiple judges (the Shelby County setup is the obvious example) counts as more than one court for purposes of the clerk's compensation. The pay difference matters: under Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-24-102(j)(2), a clerk who serves "more than one (1) court" or who serves a court with probate jurisdiction is entitled to a 10% supplement on top of the base.

The AG's answer was that even a divided General Sessions Court remains a single court. § 16-15-101 establishes that each county has a General Sessions Court of specified jurisdiction. Where the General Assembly has created multiple divisions or dockets within that court (Shelby County's 1941 Tenn. Priv. Acts, ch. 123 is the cited example), it has done so by establishing "a court" (singular) "which shall be divided into four (4) divisions" with "one civil docket and one criminal docket for the court" and a single "Clerk of the Court of General Sessions of Shelby County." The structure described one court, just internally divided.

The 10% multi-court supplement was therefore not available on a "multiple divisions" theory. To get the supplement, the clerk would need to either (1) actually serve two separate courts (for example, also serving as clerk of a different inferior court) or (2) serve as clerk of a General Sessions Court that exercises probate jurisdiction.

The opinion declined to expand the exception, citing Sneyd v. Washington County, 387 S.W.3d 1, 7-8 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012), and Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 06-162. The General Assembly drew a clean line, and the AG read it that way.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2018. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Background and statutory framework

Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-24-102 sets minimum compensation for "general officers" of a county on a population-tier scale, and clerks of general sessions courts are general officers under § 8-24-102(a). Hayes v. Gibson County, 288 S.W.3d 334, 338-39 (Tenn. 2009), is the foundational case on this scheme. § 8-24-102(h) requires pay parity: "[a]ll general officers of the county" must be paid the same amount.

The supplement carve-out is in § 8-24-102(j)(2): a "clerk of court who serves more than one (1) court in the county" or a clerk who "serves as clerk of the court that exercises probate jurisdiction" may receive "additional compensation in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the clerk's base compensation."

The court-structure piece comes from § 16-15-101 (each county has a General Sessions Court of specified jurisdiction) plus the relevant private acts establishing internal divisions. The Shelby County private act language (1941 Tenn. Priv. Acts, ch. 123, as amended) was cited to show how the legislature framed even a four-division General Sessions Court as "a court."

Common questions

When does a Tennessee General Sessions Court clerk get the 10% supplement?

Under § 8-24-102(j)(2), only when the clerk (1) serves a second court in addition to General Sessions, or (2) serves a General Sessions Court that has probate jurisdiction. Multiple divisions or dockets within General Sessions itself are not enough.

Why doesn't a Shelby County (or similar) clerk qualify just because the court is huge?

Because the legislature established that court as one court. The 1941 private act describes "a court" "which shall be divided into four (4) divisions" with one clerk. Volume of work and complexity of internal dockets do not change the single-court structure for compensation purposes.

What about counties where the General Sessions Court does have probate jurisdiction?

Those clerks are eligible for the supplement under the second prong of § 8-24-102(j)(2). The opinion did not reach which specific counties currently meet that condition.

Can a county pay its General Sessions Clerk more than the parity rate even without the supplement?

Under § 8-24-102 as the opinion read it, the statute sets minimum compensation and requires parity among all general officers, and the (j)(2) carve-out is the only deviation it identifies. Paying a General Sessions Clerk more than other general officers, outside the (j)(2) carve-out, would run against that parity rule.

What if a clerk also serves as clerk of probate court that's organizationally separate?

That would be the classic "serves more than one court" situation under (j)(2). The clerk would be eligible for the 10% supplement.

Does this opinion bind the courts?

No. AG opinions in Tennessee are persuasive authority. The reading here closely tracks the plain text and is consistent with Sneyd, so a court would likely reach the same conclusion, but the opinion itself is not binding on a chancellor or Court of Appeals reviewing a contested compensation dispute.

Citations

Statutes

• Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-24-102 (county general officer compensation; (a) base scale, (h) parity, (j)(2) multi-court supplement)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-101 (General Sessions Court establishment)

Cases

• Hayes v. Gibson County, 288 S.W.3d 334 (Tenn. 2009)
• Sneyd v. Washington County, 387 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012)

Private acts

• 1941 Tenn. Priv. Acts, ch. 123, as amended (Shelby County General Sessions Court)

Prior AG opinions

• Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 13-49 (July 1, 2013)
• Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 06-162 (Oct. 12, 2006)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/opinions.html
• Original PDF: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/ops/2018/op18-43.pdf

Original opinion text

September 17, 2018

Opinion No. 18-43

Compensation of General Sessions Clerk

Question

Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-24-102, is a General Sessions Court that includes separate criminal and civil dockets and multiple judges considered a single court for purposes of calculating the compensation of a clerk?

Opinion

Yes.

ANALYSIS

Tennessee Code Annotated § 8-24-102 establishes the minimum level of compensation for various county officers. See Hayes v. Gibson County, 288 S.W.3d 334, 338-39 (Tenn. 2009). "General officers" of a county are entitled to the minimum compensation specified in § 8-24-102 for a county of that particular population, and the "clerks of general sessions courts" are included within the definition of "general officers." Tenn. Code Ann. § 8-24-102(a).

Accordingly, the minimum compensation for the clerk of a General Sessions Court is established in § 8-24-102(a). Section 8-24-102 does not prescribe the maximum salary for a court clerk, but it does mandate generally that "[a]ll general officers of the county," including clerks, be paid the same amount. Id. § 8-24-102(h).

The legislature has provided one very specific and limited exception for court clerks to this requirement of pay parity. Under § 8-24-102(j)(2), a "clerk of court who serves more than one (1) court in the county" or a clerk who "serves as clerk of the court that exercises probate jurisdiction" may receive "additional compensation in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the clerk's base compensation." See Sneyd v. Washington County, 387 S.W.3d 1, 7-8 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012); Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 06-162 (Oct. 12, 2006). In other words, the exception allowing a clerk to be paid the ten-percent supplement applies in only two instances: (1) if the clerk serves more than one court and (2) if the clerk serves only one court and that court has probate jurisdiction. There is no exception for clerks who serve a single court staffed by more than one judge.

Even when a General Sessions Court has multiple divisions or dockets, the clerk of that court does not "serve[] more than one court" for purposes of § 8-24-102(j) because that court is, in each county, a single, unified court. Each county has a single General Sessions Court of specified jurisdiction. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-15-101. In some counties, such as Shelby County, the legislature has created multiple divisions or dockets within that General Sessions Court through private acts, but that legislation does not change the fact that the court remains a single, unified court, if anything, it reinforces that the court is a single court. See 1941 Tenn. Priv. Acts, ch. 123, as amended (establishing "a court in and for Shelby County, Tennessee, which shall be divided into four (4) divisions," providing that "there shall be one civil docket and one criminal docket for the court," and establishing "[t]he office of Clerk of the Court of General Sessions of Shelby County") (emphasis added); see also Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 13-49 (July 1, 2013) (discussing the election of the "Clerk of the Court of the Shelby County General Sessions Court").

In short, the clerk of a General Sessions Court must be compensated based on the minimum compensation scale for "general officers" set out in § 8-24-102. But the clerk of a General Sessions Court, even one divided into multiple divisions and dockets, is not eligible for the ten percent increase authorized by § 8-24-102(j) unless she also serves as the clerk of another court or the General Sessions Court exercises probate jurisdiction. See Sneyd, 387 S.W.3d at 7; Tenn. Att'y Gen. Op. 06-162, at 2. The General Sessions Court of a particular county is a single "court" for purposes of § 8-24-102.

HERBERT H. SLATERY III
Attorney General and Reporter

ANDRÉE SOPHIA BLUMSTEIN
Solicitor General

JONATHAN DAVID SHAUB
Assistant Solicitor General

Requested by:
The Honorable Raumesh Akbari
Cordell Hull Bldg., Ste 660
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243