Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a plaintiff one year to file a medical battery claim.

Bailey v. Tasker · filed 2004-03-17(a)(1)

If the plaintiffs are claiming a medical battery, the period of limitations is again one year, but this time pursuant to the provisions of Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) (2000).

A disputed filing date requires an evidentiary hearing before a personal tort claim can be dismissed under the one-year limitations period.

Johnson v. Corrections Corporation of America · filed 2001-09-12

With this discrepancy in the record, along with plaintiff’s assertion and the evidence filed therewith concerning the correct filing date, the dismissal of the case by virtue of the statute of limitations without an evidentiary hearing was inappropriate.

Section 28-3-104 imposes a one-year limit on claims for personal injury, including claims seeking damages for mental anguish and harm to reputation.

Pera v. Kroger Co. · filed 1984-08-13

It is well settled in this state that the gravamen of an action, rather than its designation as an action for tort or contract, determines the applicable statute of limitations. In this state the general statute of limitations for personal injury is one year. T.C.A. § 28-3-104. The bank insists that the claim as presented was purely one for personal injuries, that this statute applies and that the claim is time-barred. We agree and dismiss the action against the bank.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives plaintiffs one year to bring personal injury claims based on negligence or strict liability; breach of warranty claims are governed by a different limitations period.

Turner v. Aldor Co. of Nashville, Inc. · filed 1991-11-20(a)(1)

The passage of one year after Mr. Turner’s injury does not necessarily foreclose all his claims because they are all not governed by the same statute of limitations. While his strict liability and negligence claims are barred by Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(l), his warrantly claims are not because they are governed by the four-year statute of limitations in Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-2-725(1) (Supp.1991).

Section 28-3-104 imposes a one-year limit on personal injury actions; an action is barred when the plaintiff fails to preserve its timely commencement under Rule 3.

Vanhooser v. Ling · filed 1993-10-27

Having failed to comply with the provisions of Rule 3 by timely reissuance of summons or timely filing of a new suit, plaintiffs have subjected themselves to the bar of the one year statute on actions for personal injuries. T.C.A. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year period begins when the plaintiff suffers a legally cognizable injury, even if related criminal charges remain pending.

Shell v. State · filed 1995-01-17

The Claims Commission dismissed the complaint, [1] holding that both causes of action had accrued prior to October 17, 1988, and were therefore barred by the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104. ... We therefore hold that the issue of when this cause of action accrued is to be determined by reference to generally applicable principles of negligence law. ... Therefore, we hold that the accrual of the cause of action depends on when the plaintiff has suffered a legally cognizable injury.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) requires an employee to file a personal injury claim within one year of the injury.

Draper v. Reaver · filed 1997-04-11(a)(1)

The employee must file his or her personal injury claims within one year from the date of injury. ... Accordingly, the trial court was undoubtedly correct when it dismissed Mr. Draper’s personal injury claims.

Section 28-3-104 imposes a one-year limitations period on personal injury tort claims.

Young v. Toys R US, Inc. · filed 1997-09-29

Schütz contends that all of the plaintiffs tort claims are barred by Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104, Tennessee’s one-year statute of limitations for tort personal injury claims. ... An order will enter dismissing paragraphs XI(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g),(h), and (j) as to defendant Schütz because those claims assert tort causes of action which are barred by the statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year limitations period for personal injury claims.

Fox v. City of Dover · filed 1998-10-16

The statute of limitations for personal injuries is one year. T.C.A. § 28-3-104. ... The one year statute on plaintiff’s personal injury claim against the third party wrongdoer became barred on October 15, 1996, unless extended by T.C.A. § 20-1-119. ... The judgment, dismissing plaintiff’s suit against Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company for personal injury, is affirmed.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) requires personal injury actions to be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Lipscomb v. Doe · filed 1998-12-16(a)(1)

Under Tennessee’s one year limitations period applicable to personal injury claims, the last day for filing an action against Logan, Chaney, and Dyson was September 24, 1996. ... We thus find that Lipscomb’s claims against Logan, Chaney, and Dyson are barred by the statute of limitations and consequently hold that they were properly dismissed by the trial court.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) requires a personal injury action to be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Pinson v. Tata · filed 1999-03-29(a)(1)

In order to be timely, an action for personal injuries must be commenced within one year of the date on which the cause of action accrued. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) (Supp. 1998).

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year limitations period for personal injury actions.

Jefferson v. Captain D's · filed 2000-08-16

Clearly, the instant case was not timely filed. It was outside the one year period of limitations applicable to personal injury actions. See T.C.A. § 28-3-104 (1999 Supp.).

Personal injury claims must be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Knight v. Ram Nationwide, Inc. · filed 2004-06-04

Ordinarily, personal injury claims under Tennessee law must be filed within one year of the accrual of the cause of action. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104.

Personal injury actions must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Keith v. Regas Real Estate Company · filed 2011-12-02(a)(1)

Actions for personal injuries must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives personal injury claims a one-year limitations period; a claim filed later is barred unless an exception applies.

Rev. J. M. Shaffer v. Memphis Airport Authority, Service Management Systems, Inc., and John Doe B. through D. · filed 2013-01-18(a)(1)

In Tennessee, personal injury claims such as Shaffer’s are subject to Tennessee’s one-year statute of limitations. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) (2000). In this case, Shaffer did not amend her complaint to add SMS as a defendant until May 4, 2011, over two years after her April 2009 injury at the airport. Therefore, it is undisputed that Shaffer’s claims against SMS are time-barred unless Shaffer meets her burden of establishing an exception to the statute of limitations.

Personal injury actions generally must be commenced within one year of the injury.

Robert L. McCullough, Jr. v. Vaughn · filed 2017-04-27(a)(1)

Generally, an action for personal injury must be commenced within one year of the date the plaintiff sustained injury.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) sets a one-year limitations period for personal injury actions; a timely filed claim is barred if the plaintiff fails to obtain new process within the required time after unsuccessful service.

Gregory Websterv. David M. Isaacs · filed 2019-08-21(a)(1)

Mr. Isaacs’s original answer put the Websters on notice that service of process was at issue and, when they failed to reissue the summons to serve him by November 14, 2017, the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions barred their claims. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3- 104(a)(1).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) imposes a one-year limit on claims based on personal injury, including claims that do not rely on a product liability theory, unless a more specific Tennessee statute sets a different limit.

Wanke v. Invasix Inc. · filed 2021-02-01(a)(1)(A)

Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(A), however, applies to causes of action based on injury to the person, whether they are product liability-based or not, unless, of course, some more specific Tennessee statute sets a different limit.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) sets a one-year limit for claims based on personal injury, regardless of whether they use a product liability theory, unless a more specific Tennessee statute applies.

Jones v. Invasix Inc. · filed 2021-02-01(a)(1)(A)

Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(A), however, applies to causes of action based on injury to the person, whether they are product liability-based or not, unless, of course, some more specific Tennessee statute sets a different limit.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a person one year to bring a claim for injuries to the person.

Ruby Bridges v. Roth · filed 2021-11-04(a)(1)

The statute of limitations for injuries to the person is one year. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) sets a one-year limitations period from the date of injury for a personal injury claim.

Urquia v. Neal · filed 2026-02-27(a)(1)(A)

The statute of limitations applicable to Ms. Urquia’s claim against Mr. Neal was one year from the date of injury. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(A).

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year limitations period for personal injury actions.

Myers v. Hurst Construction Company, Inc. · filed 1997-03-05

The circuit court case which is the subject of this appeal was not filed until February 8, 1996, four years and three months after the occurrence of plaintiff’s injury which was subject to a one year statute of limitation. T.C.A. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104's one-year personal injury limitations period applies to wrongful death actions.

Harper v. Gibson · filed 1985-01-17

The courts of that state apply the one-year statute of limitations governing actions for personal injuries to actions for wrongful death. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; Jones v. Black, 539 S.W.2d 123 (Tenn. 1976).

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year statute of limitations for wrongful death actions.

Vaughn v. J.C. Penney Co. · filed 1987-06-24

Since Tennessee provides for a one-year statute of limitations in wrongful death actions, see Collier v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div., 657 S.W.2d 771, 774 (Tenn.App.1983); Jones v. Black, 539 S.W.2d 123 (Tenn.1976); Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104, and since this action was filed nearly two years after the deaths occurred, the district court appropriately concluded that the actions were time-barred.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limit applies to wrongful death actions; the discovery rule does not extend the filing period until the plaintiff learns every fact affecting the claim.

Walter Lee Steele and Jennie Brown, Individually and as Next-of-Kin of or Guardian of Melvin Lee Steele v. Tennessee Jay · filed 1995-10-25

The courts have uniformly held the one year period of limitations on actions for personal injury found in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 to be the appropriate one to apply in wrongful death cases. ... The discovery rule was not meant to allow a party to delay filing his claim until after he has completed the process of discovering all the factors that affect its merits.

Section 28-3-104 gives a Tennessee wrongful death claim one year from the decedent's death to be filed.

Thompson Ex Rel. Thompson v. Crawford · filed 1992-06-02

Tennessee law requires that a cause of action for personal injury be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 (1980). Thus, as construed by the Tennessee Supreme Court, a cause of action for wrongful death must also be commenced within one year after the death of the decedent.

Section 28-3-104 applies a one-year limitations period to wrongful death actions.

Olsmith v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc. · filed 1997-03-27(a)(1)

There is no disagreement in this ease that, as a wrongful death action, Plaintiffs’ claim is subject to the one year limitations period set forth in T.C.A. § 28-3-104 (Michie Supp.1996).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) requires wrongful-death actions to be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Hall v. Summit Contractors, Inc. · filed 2004-04-08(a)(1)

Tennessee’s applicable statute of limitations is found in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1), which provides that “[actions for . . . injuries to the person” shall be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued. Tennessee cases have been clear for more than a century that this statute of limitations applies to wrongful-death actions.

Section 28-3-104 gives wrongful death claims a one-year limitations period, including claims arising from a minor’s death.

Lemons v. Cloer · filed 2006-04-28

First, it is important to note that “our courts have uniformly applied the one-year statute of limitation contained in § 28-3-104 governing actions for personal injuries to actions for wrongful death.” ... Because Tennessee’s one-year statute of limitations applies to these claims, and because Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-106 does not have the effect of tolling the limitations period, the trial court correctly dismissed the Sluder and Silvers claims.

Section 28-3-104 supplies a one-year limitations period for wrongful death actions.

Burk v. RHA/Sullivan, Inc. · filed 2006-10-02

Tennessee law does not specify a statute of limitations for wrongful death actions. Rather, courts have uniformly applied the one-year limitations period for personal injuries, as found in Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limit for personal injury actions applies to wrongful death actions.

Holliman v. McGrew · filed 2009-02-05

The Tennessee legislature has not adopted a statute of limitations specifically for wrongful death actions. Courts, however, have applied the one-year limitation on actions for personal injuries. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; Burk v. RHA/Sullivan, Inc., 220 S.W.3d 896, 900 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); Hathaway v. Middle Tennessee Anesthesiology, P.C., 724 S.W.2d 355, 356 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) provides a one-year limitations period for wrongful death actions, measured from when the decedent’s injury claim accrued.

Johnson v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div. · filed 2015-02-06(a)(1)

Tennessee’s wrongful death statute does not contain a statute of limitations, but Tennessee has long held that wrongful death actions are governed by the statute of limitations for personal injuries, which provides that an action must commence within a year after accrual. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1); Sullivan ex rel. Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Sullivan v. Chattanooga Med. Investors, LP, 221 S.W.3d 506, 508 (Tenn. 2007).

Section 28-3-104(b) gives a plaintiff one year from the injury to file a personal injury claim involving an allegedly defective product.

Bell v. P & B Manufacturing Corp. · filed 1985-09-18(b)

The statute of limitations in Tennessee for a personal injury allegedly due to a defective product is one year after the date of the injury. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(b) (1980).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) requires a personal injury complaint to be filed within one year of the injury.

Azari v. Greyhound Bus Station, Nashville, Tennessee · filed 2011-08-24(a)(1)

We affirm the trial court’s judgment because Tenn. Code Ann. §28-3-104(a)(1) requires a plaintiff suing for personal injuries to file his complaint within one year of the date of the alleged assault resulting in injuries.

Section 28-3-104’s limitation period for legal malpractice claims does not bar a separate contribution claim governed by the UCATA.

Manning v. Fort Deposit Bank · filed 1985-10-15

In light of the foregoing, this court finds that Fort Deposit Bank’s right to contribution is not barred by the general statute of limitations of Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year period for injuries to the person does not apply when the complaint’s gravamen is conversion of personal property.

Crowe v. First American · filed 2001-08-29

The Bank argues that Crowe’s action is barred under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 (2000), the one-year statute of limitations for “injuries to the person.” ... After a review of the complaint filed by Crowe, we are of the opinion that the gravamen of Crowe’s complaint is for conversion governed by Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-105.

Section 28-3-104 imposes a one-year limitations period for personal tort actions.

Janzen v. Knox County Board of Education · filed 1986-05-08

In Tennessee, five separate statutes of limitations could apply in the Janzen situation: ... (2) a one-year statute of limitations for personal torts, Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; ... The one-year limitation for personal tort actions is, we believe, also inapplicable. Though a personal tort is perhaps more analogous to the facte before us in the present case than the situations discussed, the action before us is not similar to an action on a personal tort. ... Further, the one-year limitation is not consistent with the federal concerns which must always remain paramount. ... The shorter one-year Tennessee personal tort limitations period is simply too short a time in these circumstances. We believe that this short limitations period would constrict the rights created by Congress when it enacted the Handicapped Act.

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions.

White Ex Rel. White v. Winnebago Industries, Inc. · filed 1989-07-06

Tennessee has a personal injury statute of limitations of one year. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104. However, an overarching limitation of actions provision applies to products liability claims.

Section 28-3-104 requires personal injury suits to be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues.

Brown v. State · filed 1989-11-01

The applicable statute of limitations is T.C.A. § 28-3-104 which requires that suits for personal injury be filed within one year after the cause of action accrued.

Section 28-3-104 requires personal injury and products liability actions to be filed within one year after accrual, with products liability claims accruing when the injury occurs or is discovered.

Craig ex rel. craig v. R.R. Street & Co. · filed 1990-01-12(a), (b)

Under T.C.A. § 29-28-103 (1980), personal injury actions against manufacturers or sellers for defective or unreasonably dangerous conditions of products must be brought within the period fixed by T.C.A. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) gives a plaintiff one year to bring an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim.

Webster v. Sontara Old Hickory, Inc. · filed 2021-05-10(a)(1)(A)

Thus, the statute of limitations for intentional infliction of emotional distress in Tennessee is that for injury to the person, which is one year.

Section 28-3-104 gives a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress a one-year limitations period.

Adkins v. Pilot Flying J · filed 2023-06-30

“‘[I]ntentional infliction of emotional distress is a personal injury tort, governed by the general one-year statute of limitations’ in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104.” Campbell v. AdhereHealth, LLC, No. 19-CV-730, 2020 WL 5702471, at *5 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 23, 2020) (quoting Leach v. Taylor, 124 S.W.3d 87, 91 (Tenn. 2004)). ... The Court, therefore, considers only those alleged acts of Defendants that fall within the relevant one-year statute of limitations period.

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year limitations period for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims.

Demarest v. Kovacevich · filed 2025-08-14

The one-year statute of limitations set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28- 3-104 applies to negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) sets a one-year limitations period for attorney malpractice claims.

Johnson v. Gulley · filed 2003-03-31(a)(2)

This cause of action is barred by the one-year limitations period prescribed by Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to file a legal malpractice claim.

Hill v. Moncier · filed 2003-06-20(a)(2)

Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), a plaintiff has a period of one year within which to file a claim for legal malpractice. ... Hill did not file his complaint for malpractice in the criminal case within one year of June 21, 2000, and therefore, his claim pertaining to his federal criminal case is barred by the one-year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to file a legal malpractice claim after the plaintiff suffers an injury and knows or reasonably should know it was caused by the attorney's negligence.

Hill v. Moncier · filed 2003-07-11(a)(2)

Under Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), a plaintiff has a period of one year within which to file a claim for legal malpractice. The discovery rule for legal malpractice means that a cause of action accrues when (1) the client suffers an actual or legally cognizable injury, and (2) the client knows, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should know, that the injury was caused by the attorney's negligence. ... Hill did not file his complaint for malpractice in the criminal case within one year of June 21, 2000, and therefore, his claim pertaining to his federal criminal case is barred by the one-year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) requires malpractice suits against attorneys, whether based in contract or tort, to be filed within one year after the claim accrues.

Dickerson v. Brown · filed 2003-12-17(a)(2)

From the undisputed facts, however, it is readily apparent that Dickerson’s legal malpractice claim was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations provided in Tennessee Code Annotated § 28-3-104(a)(2).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year from accrual to bring an attorney malpractice claim.

Doyle Shirt Manufacturing Corporation v. O'Mara · filed 1999-04-07(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for attorney mal-practice is one year from the date of accrual.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year after accrual to bring an attorney malpractice action, whether based in contract or tort.

Hodge v. Edwards · filed 1999-10-18(a)(2)

Attorney malpractice actions are governed by T. C. A. § 28-3-104(a), which provides: ... (a) The following actions shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued: ... (2) Actions and suits against attorneys or licensed public accountants or certified public accountants for malpractice, whether the actions are grounded or based in contract or tort. ... Since he did not file his complaint within one year of May 2, 1997, his suit was filed too late.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring an attorney malpractice claim after the plaintiff knows or should know of an irremediable injury caused by the attorney’s negligence.

Storey v. Poss · filed 2000-09-20(a)(2)

We find the Trial Court did not err in dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint because the Complaint was filed more than one year from the date by which Plaintiff knew or should have known that he suffered an irremediable injury as a result of Defendant’s alleged negligence.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year period for legal malpractice claims begins when the client knows of the attorney’s negligence and suffers injury, even if other damages become clear later.

Memphis Aero Corp. v. Swain · filed 1986-12-30

These damages were occurring from the time of the filing of Argonauts’ lawsuit and together with Memphis Aero’s knowledge of Swain’s negligence were sufficient injury to trigger the accrual of plaintiff’s cause of action. Accordingly, we hold that Memphis Aero’s suit filed December, 1983, was filed more than one year after the accrual of its cause of action and therefore is barred by the statute of limitations, T.C.A. § 28-3-104 (1980).

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring a legal malpractice action after the negligence becomes irremediable and the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should discover, the resulting injury; futile efforts to revive the underlying claim do not delay accrual.

Batchelor v. Heiskell, Donelson, Bearman, Adams, Williams & Kirsch · filed 1991-07-17(a)(2)

Regardless of when the plaintiffs in this case should have reasonably discovered their resulting injury, it is apparent that they actually knew that they were injured by the defendant’s negligence on July 17, 1980, when the letter was written to Heis-kell. ... For the foregoing reasons we are of the opinion that this action is time barred and the defendants are entitled to summary judgment.

A legal malpractice claim does not accrue while injury from an attorney’s negligence remains speculative; in this setting, injury arose when the bankruptcy trustee challenged the deeds of trust.

Caledonia Leasing & Equipment Co. v. Armstrong, Allen, Braden, Goodman, McBride & Prewitt · filed 1992-11-17(a)(2)

We think, however, that any injury suffered by a debtor prior to a trustee’s determination that a transfer might be a preference is too speculative and uncertain for purposes of determining when a legal malpractice action accrues.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2)’s one-year period for legal malpractice begins when the client suffers an actual injury and knows or reasonably should know that the attorney’s negligence caused it; the period does not wait for appeals in the underlying case to end.

Carvell v. Bottoms · filed 1995-05-30(a)(2)

Under this standard, the Carvells should have “known” that they had been injured as a result of Bottoms’s negligence when they were sued in February 1986. ... Although the “tolling” argument pressed by the plaintiffs has been accepted in some jurisdictions, it is not supported by our cases.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) sets a one-year limitations period for legal malpractice claims.

Locust v. State · filed 1995-06-02(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for legal malpractice is one year. (T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2)).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year from accrual to file a legal malpractice claim; an attorney’s knowledge of the injury can be imputed to the client for accrual purposes.

Smith v. Petkoff · filed 1995-09-28(a)(2)

The one year statute of limitations on plaintiffs malpractice claim began to run on that date. Because plaintiffs complaint against the law firm was not filed until April 30, 1993, we are of the opinion that plaintiffs cause of action was time-barred.

Section 28-3-104 requires an action against an attorney to be commenced within one year after it accrues; tendering a defective complaint without correcting it does not toll that period.

Sammons v. Leroy Phillips, Jr. Leonard Mike Caputo · filed 1992-02-27

The district court held Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104, which states that actions taken against attorneys "shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued ...," applied to the instant case. ... The district court held and we agree that there was no timely filing in the Middle District of Florida. The complaint was tendered for filing and was defective. No corrective measures were taken to toll the statute of limitation, thus the tendered amended complaint was time barred.

Section 28-3-104 sets a one-year limitations period for legal malpractice actions.

El Rayford v. Stephen Leffler (Order) · filed 1997-03-31

As set forth in T.C.A. §28-3-104 (1980) and T.C.A. §29-26-116(a)(1) (1980), the statute of limitations for malpractice actions is one year.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives legal malpractice claims a one-year filing period that begins when the plaintiff has suffered an actual injury and knows or reasonably should know it resulted from the attorney’s negligence.

John Kohl & Co. v. Dearborn & Ewing · filed 1997-04-23(a)(2)

The statute of limitations as to any claims resulting from the IRA rollovers began to run on 24 October 1988. As of that date, Plaintiffs had suffered an actual injury and had the requisite knowledge. Plaintiffs filed their complaint on 1 May 1990. The trial court correctly determined the statute of limitations barred Plaintiffs’ claims because they filed their complaint more than one year after the cause of action accrued. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) (Supp. 1996).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to file a legal malpractice claim after the plaintiff suffers an actual injury and knows or should know that the lawyer’s negligence caused it.

Bradson Mercantile, Inc. v. Crabtree · filed 1999-02-16(a)(2)

An action for legal malpractice must be commenced “within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued.” T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2) (Supp.1997). ... Thus, a cause of action for legal malpractice accrues when: 1) the defendant’s negligence causes the plaintiff to suffer a legally cognizable or actual injury; and 2) the plaintiff knows “or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known that this injury was caused by defendant’s negligence.”

Legal malpractice actions must be filed within one year after the cause of action accrues.

John Kohl & Co. PC v. Dearborn & Ewing · filed 1998-10-05(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for legal malpractice is one year from the time the cause of action accrues.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives plaintiffs one year after accrual to bring an accountant malpractice action; under the discovery rule, accrual requires notice that the injury resulted from the accountant’s wrongful conduct.

Dunlap v. Ayers · filed 1999-04-23(a)(2)

The statute provides that malpractice actions against attorneys, licensed public accountants, and certified public accountants “shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued.” ... From this evidence, we conclude that a reasonable person could find that on December 13, 1993, Dunlap neither knew nor should have known that the Plaintiffs had sustained an injury as a result of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct.

The one-year period for legal malpractice begins when the client suffers an actual injury and knows or reasonably should know that the attorney’s negligence caused it.

Wilson v. CNA Ins. · filed 1999-10-19(a)(2)

We have carefully reviewed the evidence in the record presented to this Court and conclude that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Weber knew or should have known more than one year prior to filing this legal malpractice action that he had suffered an injury as a result of Mathes’ wrongful conduct.

Legal malpractice actions have a one-year limitations period that begins when the plaintiff has suffered actual injury and knows or reasonably should know that negligence caused it.

Harriet & Henderson Yarns, Inc. v. Castle · filed 1999-12-03

In Tennessee, the statute of limitations in a legal malpractice action is one year from the date on which the cause of action accrues. Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104. The Supreme Court of Tennessee has ruled that the time period begins to run only when each of two distinct elements has been satisfied: (1) the plaintiff must suffer an actual injury as a result of the defendant’s negligence, and (2) the plaintiff must know or reasonably should have known that the injury was caused by defendant’s negligence. ... In this case, Plaintiffs did not suffer an actual injury until the distribution of Star’s assets, or at the earliest, when Plaintiffs were classified as unsecured creditors after Star filed for bankruptcy in August, 1996. Thus Plaintiffs’ lawsuit, filed in June, 1997, was filed within the statute of limitations period.

The one-year period for a legal malpractice claim begins when the client discovers a cognizable injury and its cause, even if the lawyer continues to represent the client.

Cherry v. Williams · filed 2000-04-17(a)(2)

In the context of a legal malpractice claim, we now hold that a litigant who learns that it has suffered a cognizable legal injury and that this injury was caused by the negligence of its lawyer but who nevertheless continues to be represented by that lawyer will be forever barred from bringing suit against the lawyer unless it files suit within one year after the discovery of the injury and its cause.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives legal malpractice claims a one-year limitations period, whether they are based in contract or tort.

Farris v. Todd · filed 2000-05-03(a)(2)

The applicable statute of limitations for legal malpractice is one year, whether the action is based in contracts or torts. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) (1999).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year from accrual to bring a legal malpractice claim, and a criminal malpractice claim can accrue before post-conviction relief is granted.

Gibson v. Trant · filed 2001-10-05(a)(2)

A final issue relates to how our holding affects the statute of limitations for bringing malpractice claims, which is one year from the time the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). ... Since we hold today that a criminal defendant must first obtain post-conviction relief, for that is an element of his criminal malpractice claim, the question arises whether he could have "discovered" his action prior to the post-conviction court's ruling. The answer to this question must be in the affirmative.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year from accrual to file a legal malpractice claim; information learned by the plaintiff’s counsel can start that period.

Lane-Detman, L.L.C. v. Miller & Martin · filed 2001-10-17(a)(2)

The statute of limitations applicable to Plaintiffs’ legal malpractice claim is found at Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), which provides for a one-year limitations period after the cause of action accrues. ... Since this information is imputed to Plaintiffs, we hold that the statute of limitations began running on July 20, 1998, and that Plaintiffs’ Complaint filed against Defendants Miller & Martin and McGinness is time-barred.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives legal malpractice claims a one-year limitations period that begins when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know the injury was caused by the attorney’s conduct; knowledge acquired by the plaintiff’s counsel is imputed to the plaintiff.

Lane-Detman, L.L.C. v. Miller & Martin · filed 2002-01-09(a)(2)

We find that the undisputed material facts contained in the record on appeal show that by July 20, 1998, Plaintiffs’ Memphis counsel acquired information from Milner which would have placed a reasonable person on notice that the 1995 background search performed by Defendants Miller & Martin and McGinness was inaccurate. Since this information is imputed to Plaintiffs, we hold that the statute of limitations began running on July 20, 1998, and that Plaintiffs’ Complaint filed against Defendants Miller & Martin and McGinness is time-barred. Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2).

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) requires a professional malpractice claim to be filed within one year after the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known it accrued.

Cotter v. Burkhalter · filed 2002-04-30(a)(2)

A professional malpractice claim must be filed within one year of when the claim accrued. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). What is usually disputed, and what is seldom clear, is when did the plaintiff know or when should the plaintiff have reasonably known that a claim accrued.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring a legal malpractice claim after the plaintiff knows or should know of a legally cognizable injury and its cause; continued representation does not toll the period.

Wincor, Inc. v. Dunlap · filed 2004-02-27

In its first issue on appeal, Wincor maintains that the lower court erred in finding that the one-year statute of limitations for malpractice claims, set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104, bars the present action. ... Tennessee courts do not, however, follow the continuous representation doctrine. ... Instead, the statute of limitations in a malpractice case begins to run “when the client suffers a legally cognizable injury resulting from an attorney’s negligence or other wrongdoing, and the client knows or should know the facts sufficient to give notice of that injury.” ... As the one-year statute of limitations expired, at the latest, in November 2000, the trial court properly found that Wincor’s suit filed in February 2002 against Dunlap was barred.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to file a legal malpractice claim after the claim accrues, which can occur when the plaintiff knows or should know of the injury.

Humphreys v. Argabrite · filed 2006-01-13(a)(2)

We disagree, because we conclude that under the facts outlined below, the plaintiff had one year from the date that the divorce decree became final in December 2000 in which to file this action against former counsel and that the limitations period ran out in December 2001, almost two years before suit was filed.

Legal malpractice actions must be filed within one year after the client suffers a legally cognizable injury and knows or should know the facts giving notice of it.

Tenn-Fla Partners v. Shelton · filed 2007-02-26(a)(2)

In legal malpractice actions, the one-year statute of limitations starts to run when the client suffers a legally cognizable injury resulting from an attorney's negligence, and the client knows or should know the facts sufficient to give notice of that injury.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to bring a legal malpractice claim after it accrues; accrual requires an actual injury and knowledge, actual or reasonably discoverable, that the attorney’s conduct caused it.

Honeycutt v. Wilkes, Mccullough & Wagner, and Barbara McCullough, Individually · filed 2007-08-02(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for legal malpractice claims is one year from the time the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) (2000). When a cause of action accrues is determined by the discovery rule.

Legal malpractice claims have a one-year limitations period running from accrual.

Jones v. Cox · filed 2008-11-25(a)(2)

The applicable statute of limitations for legal malpractice claims is one-year from the accrual thereof.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a legal malpractice plaintiff one year from accrual to sue, and the claim accrues when the client suffers an injury and knows or should know the attorney caused it.

Alfie Tucker v. Tabitha Finch · filed 2011-08-30(a)(2)

Legal malpractice actions against attorneys must be “commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). ... While the passing of the statute of limitations for his claim was also a consequence of Ms. Finch’s negligence, Mr. Tucker should have filed his suit against her within one year of July 25, 2007, the date on which the circuit court dismissed his case. Because Mr. Tucker filed his suit on April 15, 2009, his suit was untimely.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year from accrual to bring a legal malpractice claim, with accrual determined by the discovery rule.

Riddle v. Carlton · filed 2012-05-31(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for legal malpractice claims is one year from the time the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). When a cause of action accrues is determined by the discovery rule.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives a plaintiff one year to bring a legal malpractice claim after the plaintiff suffers an actual injury and knows or should know it was caused by the attorney’s conduct; the injury can occur before a final order.

Joseph E. Rich, M.D. v. Warlick · filed 2014-04-16(a)(2)

The statute of limitations for claims of professional malpractice is one year from the date of the incident giving rise to the claim. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). ... The ALJ’s order deprived Dr. Rich of a legal right that tends to be of critical importance in proceedings involving professional licensing - the right to defend oneself through the use of expert testimony. Thus, that order satisfied the injury component of a claim for legal malpractice. ... The content of that letter satisfied the second element for the accrual of a cause of action for legal malpractice, that the plaintiff knows, or should have known in the exercise of reasonable diligence, that an injury was caused by defendant’s negligence. ... We accordingly affirm the judgment of the trial court that the statute of limitations bars a malpractice cause of action based on acts of alleged negligence that occurred more than one year prior to the filing of the lawsuit.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) gives plaintiffs one year to bring a legal malpractice claim after the claim accrues.

Ostendorf v. Fox · filed 2014-07-16(a)(2)

We agree with the Trial Court that Plaintiffs’ cause of action for legal malpractice accrued no later than their receipt of this November 24, 2008 letter. Plaintiffs did not file their Complaint until March 28, 2012, well outside of the one year statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions.

The one-year period for legal malpractice claims begins when the client knows or should know of an injury caused by the lawyer’s conduct; continued reliance on the lawyer’s erroneous advice does not toll it.

Dennison v. Overton · filed 2014-08-25(a)(2)

Plaintiffs’ reliance upon Defendant’s erroneous legal advice after the dismissal of Campbell I is insufficient to toll the statute of limitations. The August 19, 2009 letter shows that Plaintiffs knew or should have known of Defendant’s wrongful or negligent conduct by the date of the letter, at the latest. Plaintiffs, given the undisputed material facts, have not shown fraudulent concealment and, therefore, the statute of limitations began to run as of the date of the August 19, 2009 letter, at the latest. As such, Plaintiffs’ suit filed September 21, 2010 was filed outside of the statute of limitations.

The one-year limitations period for claims based on statements in a report begins when the report is published.

McCord v. HCA Health Services of Tennessee, Inc. · filed 2015-04-27

However, the statute of limitations applicable to each of his claims began to run on the date of publication of the NPDB report, March 2, 2012, rather than January 9, 2012, the day the statements were made, as held by the trial court. Dr. McCord filed suit on January 18, 2013, which was within one year of the date of publication and the various claims were, therefore, timely filed.

A legal malpractice action must be filed within one year after the client suffers a legally cognizable injury and knows or should know that the attorney’s negligence caused it.

Davidson v. Baydoun · filed 2015-05-29(a)(2)

An action for legal malpractice must be brought within one year from the date the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) (2008). ... Therefore, Plaintiff‟s cause of action accrued and the statute of limitations began to run no later than July 31, 2007.

The one-year period for a legal malpractice claim begins when the client suffers an injury and knows enough facts to recognize that the attorney’s conduct may have caused it.

Story v. Bunstein · filed 2016-06-09(c)(1)

Here, we conclude that Appellants had sufficient knowledge of an injury, which was likely based on some legal malpractice, on May 7, 2013, when their claims against National Bank of Oneida and Scott Thompson were dismissed. Accordingly, the statute of limitation on Appellants‟ legal malpractice case began to run on May 7, 2013. Therefore, Appellants‟ September 3, 2014, legal malpractice complaint was untimely, and the trial court did not err in dismissing the complaint against Appellees.

Legal malpractice claims have a one-year limitations period that begins when the claim accrues under the discovery rule.

Athena of S.C., LLC v. James F. Macri, Jr. · filed 2016-10-14(c)(1)

The statute of limitations in legal malpractice actions is one year from the time the cause of action accrues. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(c)(1). ... Therefore, whether Plaintiffs‟ claim is based on the injunction-related injuries or the injuries associated with the agreed judgments, the claim accrued on August 2012 at the latest.

The one-year limit for legal malpractice begins when the client suffers an actual injury and knows or should know it resulted from the lawyer’s conduct; an adverse judgment can start the period before an appeal is resolved.

Thomas v. Myers · filed 2017-10-19(c)(1)

In view of the foregoing authority and Appellant’s own testimony, there is no dispute that Appellant’s injury stemming from Appellees’ representation in the federal case and Appellant’s knowledge of that alleged injury, occurred on the day that the district court entered judgment in favor of Ms. Taylor, on April 28, 2014. Because Mr. Thomas did not file his legal malpractice case until October 21, 2015, the trial court correctly held that his claim was time-barred.

A legal malpractice claim accrues when the client has an actual or legally cognizable injury and actual or constructive knowledge of its cause; the injury may occur before final judgment in the underlying case.

Story v. Bunstine · filed 2017-12-11(c)(1)

Therefore, we decline to hold that a final judgment in the underlying case is required before there is an actual injury for purposes of the accrual of a litigation malpractice claim. Instead, we reiterate that under Tennessee’s discovery rule, in addition to the actual or constructive knowledge requirement, the plaintiff must suffer an actual or legally cognizable injury, which depending on the particular facts may or may not occur prior to a final judgment.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a plaintiff one year to file a legal malpractice claim after it accrues; the period can begin when reasonable diligence would reveal the injury.

Rozen v. Wolff Ardis, PC · filed 2019-12-17(a)(1)

Because the Rozens filed their complaint more than a year after their cause of action accrued, it is barred by the statute of limitations. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1).

Legal malpractice claims have a one-year limitations period that begins when the plaintiff suffers an actual injury and knows or reasonably should know it resulted from the attorney’s wrongful conduct.

Outpost Solar, LLC v. Henry, Henry & Underwood, P. C. · filed 2021-03-17(c)(1)

The parties agree that the one-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions applies to Outpost Solar’s claims. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(c)(1). ... Under this rule, two distinct elements must be present before a legal malpractice cause of action accrues: injury and knowledge. ... Because Outpost Solar’s cause of action accrued before October 11, 2012, this action was untimely.

Section 28-3-104(c)(2)’s five-year repose provision does not save a legal malpractice claim absent fraudulent concealment by the attorney.

Tolson v. Herbison · filed 2021-08-12(c)(2)

Mr. Tolson’s reliance on section 28-3-104(c)(2) is misplaced. The statute of repose may extend the date for filing up to five years but only in cases where there has been fraudulent concealment of the attorney’s actions or omissions. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(c)(2). There is simply no indication that Mr. Herbison engaged in fraudulent concealment in this case.

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) imposes a one-year limit on claims against attorneys based on their professional duties, including negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation.

JRS Partners, GP v. Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl, LLC · filed 2023-05-22(c)(1)

The Court therefore finds that despite Plaintiffs not being “clients” of Mankey, Plaintiffs’ claim of negligent misrepresentation against Mankey, should be treated like a “malpractice” action and is thus subject to the one-year limitations period contained in § 28-3- 104(c)(1).

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) gives a plaintiff one year after a legal malpractice claim accrues to sue; receipt of an adverse order can start that period even if the plaintiff does not understand its legal terms.

Abdou v. Clark · filed 2024-07-03(c)(1)

In view of the foregoing and taking the averments in Mr. Abdou’s amended complaint as true, we agree that the statute of limitations on the claims arising from Appellees’ alleged failure to inform Mr. Abdou concerning the meaning of the term “with prejudice” accrued, at latest, on April 21, 2021, when he received the agreed order of partial dismissal (the same day it was entered). As such, Mr. Abdou’s February 20, 2023 complaint is barred by the one-year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) gives a plaintiff one year to bring a legal malpractice claim against an attorney, whether the claim is framed in contract or tort.

Houbbadi v. Kennedy Law Firm, PLLC · filed 2024-01-09(c)(1)

Regardless, the one-year statute of limitations applies “whether the action or suit is grounded or based in contract or tort.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(c)(1). Thus, even if the complaint states a cause of action for breach of contract, it may still be untimely under the statute.

Section 28-3-104(c)(1)’s one-year malpractice period applies to negligence and negligent-misrepresentation claims based on lawyers’ failure to meet their professional duties.

JRS Partners, GP v. Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl, LLC · filed 2024-06-07(c)(1)

Accordingly, the district court was correct to apply Tennessee’s one-year malpractice statute of limitations to the claims of negligence and negligent misrepresentation.

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) gives a plaintiff one year to bring an attorney malpractice claim, including a negligent misrepresentation claim; the discovery rule governs when that period begins.

West Tennessee Air Service, LLC v. WTAS, LLC · filed 2025-03-31(c)(1)

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) provides that “actions and suits against licensed…attorneys for malpractice shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued, whether the action or suit is grounded or based in contract or tort.” The negligent misrepresentation claim is also subject to the one-year statute of limitations. ... Accordingly, the one-year statute of limitations does not bar the claims against Williams and Ashley & Arnold that are the subject of this motion.

Section 28-3-104(c)(1) requires a legal malpractice action to be brought within one year after the claim accrues.

Celeste Lachapelle as the beneficiary of the will of James Russell Pace v. Tual · filed 2025-07-18(c)(1)

To be timely, a legal malpractice action must be brought within one year of the accrual of the claim. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(c)(1).

The one-year limitations period in § 28-3-104 does not begin to run against a minor’s claim while the minor remains under a disability.

State ex rel. Brooks v. Gunn · filed 1984-01-27(a)

Accordingly, the statute of limitations provided in T.C.A. § 28-3-104 has yet to run against Gunn and his motion for summary judgment in his favor based on the statute of limitations was meritless.

The one-year limitation period for legal malpractice is not tolled by a plaintiff’s reliance on erroneous legal advice.

Spar Gas, Inc. v. McCune · filed 1995-06-07

However, we do not believe that reliance upon erroneous legal advice can operate to toll the statute of limitations, the more so in that Mr. Braun subsequently withdrew from representation of the appellants, and Mrs. Catron undertook pro se representation.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year medical malpractice limitations period is tolled for a minor until the minor’s nineteenth birthday.

Crespo v. McCullough · filed 2008-10-29

Nevertheless, in the case of a minor who suffers an injury due to alleged medical negligence during his minority, § 28-1-106 clearly tolls the one-year medical malpractice statute of limitations, set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 (2000), until the minor’s 19th birthday.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limitations period applies to claims under the Tennessee Human Rights Act.

Bennett v. Steiner-Liff Iron & Metal Co. · filed 1992-02-24

Moreover, T.C.A. § 28-3-104 specifically holds that an action brought under the Federal Civil Rights statutes, shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrues. Plaintiff filed her complaint charging a violation of T.C.A. § 4-21-101 and § 4-21-401. These statutes are an integral part of the Tennessee Human Rights Act. The stated purpose and intent of Title 4, Chapter 21, is to provide for execution within Tennessee of the policies embodied in the Federal Civil Rights Act; (§ 4-21-101(a)(l)). Nothing could be more clear. The one (1) year limitation period to initiate suit in T.C.A. § 28-3-104 applies.

A false imprisonment claim accrues, and the one-year limitations period begins, when the alleged imprisonment ends.

Lovell v. Warren County, Tennessee · filed 2019-12-16(a)(1)(A)

Consistent with the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Wallace v. Kato and with the Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 899, we hold that a false imprisonment cause of action does not accrue, and the statute of limitations does not begin to run, until the termination of the imprisonment alleged.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a plaintiff one year from the arrest to file false arrest and imprisonment claims; later prosecutions on the same facts did not toll that period.

Crowe v. Bradley Equipment Rentals & Sales, Inc. · filed 2010-03-31(a)(1)

We reject Crowe’s contention about his prosecution becoming a “serial prosecution,” and find under the one-year statute of limitations contained in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3- 104(a)(1), Crowe’s state law claims for false arrest and imprisonment are time barred. The most recent set of facts giving rise to a claim of false arrest and imprisonment occurred on September 8, 2004, when he was arrested and charged with theft for the third time. Although the theft charge was not dismissed until September 26, 2006, the causes of action for false arrest and imprisonment began to accrue at the time of the arrest and not at the time of dismissal of the charge.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a plaintiff one year to bring a false imprisonment action, beginning when the detention ends.

Roger Gardner and Barbara Gardner v. James E. "Jack" Bisceglia, Shirley Bisceglia, and Harold Gilreath · filed 1992-03-11(a)(1)

Under Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1), actions for false imprisonment must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued. The general rule is that the statute of limitations for false imprisonment begins to run when the plaintiff's detention ends, not at the end of legal proceedings resulting from the arrest.

Section 28-3-104 gives libel and corresponding false light claims based on a television broadcast a one-year limitations period.

Clark v. E! Entertainment Television, LLC · filed 2014-06-12(a)(1)

Under Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-103, an action for slander must “be commenced within six (6) months after the words are uttered,” while an action for libel must “be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued,” Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104. ... Accordingly, the Court applies a one year limitation to Plaintiffs defamation and false light invasion of privacy claims.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives a state false-arrest claim a one-year limitations period.

Kellogg v. Yates (PLR1) · filed 2019-09-20(a)(1)

Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) provides that the statute of limitations for a state claim for false arrest is one year.

Section 28-3-104 provides a one-year limitations period for personal injury claims, which applies to § 1983 claims filed in Tennessee.

Jones v. Dugger · filed 2019-09-25

In Tennessee, that period is one year. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104; Foster v. State, 150 S.W.3d 166, 168 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (applying the one-year statute of limitations from Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 in a § 1983 claim).

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) provides a one-year limitations period for § 1983 actions arising in Tennessee.

Rhoades v. Moore · filed 2020-02-11(a)(1)

The limitations period for § 1983 actions arising in Tennessee is the one-year limitations provision found in Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1).

Section 28-3-104(a) provides a one-year limitations period for Section 1983 claims arising in Tennessee.

Gooch v. Charles · filed 2022-06-06(a)

Tennessee’s statute of limitations for such claims is one year. Jordan v. Blount Cnty., 885 F.3d 413, 415 (6th Cir. 2018) (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)).

Section 28-3-104(a)(3) gives personal injury claims a one-year limitations period; when false imprisonment follows a police arrest, that period runs from the arrest date.

Buress v. Bruns · filed 2023-06-16(a)(3)

In Tennessee, the statute of limitations for personal injury actions is one year. ... Under Tennessee law, any claim for false imprisonment that was preceded by a false arrest by a law enforcement officer will have its statute of limitations run from the date of an individual’s arrest, regardless of the form of the pleadings.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) gives a plaintiff one year after accrual to bring a false imprisonment claim; a stand-alone claim accrues when the imprisonment ends.

Robert-Henry Butts IV v. Berti · filed 2026-04-22(a)(1)(A)

In sum, we conclude that Appellant’s claim for false imprisonment did not accrue more than one year prior to the filing of his lawsuit. The trial court therefore erred in dismissing Appellant’s claim for false imprisonment as being barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

The one-year limit for a malicious prosecution action begins when the prior suit is finally terminated in the defendant’s favor; abandonment can constitute that termination.

Christian v. Lapidus · filed 1992-06-15(a)(1)

An action for malicious prosecution must be commenced within one year after the cause of action accrued. T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(l) (Supp.1991). A cause of action for malicious prosecution accrues when a malicious suit is finally terminated in the defendant’s favor. ... We find that any cause of action Plaintiffs may have had for malicious prosecution accrued upon the February 16, 1988 filing of Defendants’ amended complaint.

The one-year limitations period for personal injury actions applies to LMRDA § 101(a)(5) claims.

Holmes v. Donovan · filed 1993-01-25(a)(1)

We hold that the district court should have applied the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions contained in Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) to Bradley's LMRDA § 101(a)(5) claim.

Section 28-3-104(a)(2) applies a one-year limitations period to third-party claims against attorneys for professional negligence or negligent misrepresentation arising from their work as attorneys.

Hanson v. Rudnick & Wolfe · filed 1993-04-05(a)(2)

In Tennessee, at present, actions brought by third parties against attorneys for professional negligence/negligent misrepresentation of the sort involved in the instant case are to be considered "malpractice" actions and fall within the statute of limitations of Section 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limit for attorney malpractice does not apply to a title insurer’s claim against a lawyer acting as its title insurance agent.

Ticor Title Insurance Co. v. Smith · filed 1990-03-30

The Contract in this case and the facts clearly show that the relationship between Ticor and Smith was that of principal and agent and not attorney and client. The one-year statute of limitations set forth in Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104 is not applicable.

Section 28-3-104 does not specify when a cause of action accrues.

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Wood · filed 1994-11-30

With regard to T.C.A. §§ 28-3-104 and 28-3-109, the statutes fail to specifically address when the causes of action accrued.

A cause of action subject to the one-year limitation accrues when a judicial remedy becomes available.

Taylor v. City of Chattanooga, Police Department · filed 2005-01-13(a)(3)

It is well settled that a cause of action does not “accrue” until a judicial remedy is available. ... The plaintiff timely filed his action, and we affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court on this issue.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives retaliatory or wrongful discharge claims a one-year limitations period; a prior class action does not toll that period for a separate and distinct claim.

Tigg v. Pirelli Tire Corporation · filed 2005-12-22(a)(1)

Retaliatory or wrongful discharge claims have a one-year statute of limitations. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) (2000); Weber v. Moses, 938 S.W .2d 387, 393 (Tenn. 1996). ... However, the replacement workers’ claims for wrongful discharge ... are barred by the applicable statue of limitations because they are separate and distinct from the Baldwin claims.

Section 28-3-104’s limitations period for personal injury claims is not tolled by a putative class action filed in federal court.

In Re Aredia & Zometa Products Liability Litigation · filed 2010-12-07

Therefore, Plaintiff cannot claim the benefit of a cross-jurisdictional tolling doctrine to save his claims from the applicable Tennessee statute of limitations. The purported class action filed in federal court does not toll the state statute of limitations in Tennessee.

The one-year limitations period permits a continuing series of discriminatory acts to be challenged when at least one act falls within the period.

Pewitt v. Lillie Buford, A. Cliff Frensley and Williamson County, Tennessee · filed 1995-10-20(4)

Finally, the County asserts that Pewitt's claim for statutory damages pursuant to PEPFA is barred by the one year statute of limitations in T.C.A. § 28-3-104 (4) (1994). ... In any event, we think the best reasoning in this case is that the alleged discrimination against Mrs. Pewitt was a continuing series of events that merely culminated on March 9, 1992, when Mrs. Pewitt quit her job.

A factual dispute about whether discriminatory acts continued into the one-year limitations period can preclude summary judgment on timeliness.

Beach v. Ingram & Associates, Inc. · filed 1996-05-16

Again, Defendant asserts that the last alleged discriminatory act occurred on April 10, 1992, and that Plaintiffs state law claim is therefore barred by the one-year statute of limitations found in Tennessee law. Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104. For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that there are genuine issues of material fact as to what discriminatory acts occurred after April 10, 1992, which might create a “continuing violation” of Plaintiffs rights. Therefore, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on this issue is DENIED.

The one-year limitations period does not support summary judgment when factual questions remain about when the plaintiff discovered the injury or whether the alleged violation continued.

Holley v. Deal · filed 1996-12-05(a)(3)

Defendants first assert that all of Plaintiffs claims which arose before September 15, 1994, are barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations. Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(3). ... Because the Court believes that the issues of when Plaintiff discovered his injury and whether his rights were continuously violated involve questions of fact, it cannot grant summary judgment on that basis.

Section 28-3-104(a) required a Tennessee Human Rights Act claim to be filed within one year of the alleged unlawful employment practice; under the continuing violation doctrine, a discriminatory act within that year could make a series of related acts timely.

Spicer v. Beaman Bottling Co. · filed 1996-10-28(a)

The limitations period for filing suit under the Tennessee Human Rights Act when plaintiff instituted this action was contained within Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a), which required that suit be filed within one year of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

The one-year limitations period for § 1983 claims in Tennessee does not bar a claim for injunctive relief based on a continuing constitutional violation.

Kelly v. Haslam · filed 2020-05-04(a)(1)(B)

This one-year statute of limitation period will not bar a § 1983 claim seeking injunctive relief from the enforcement of a law that amounts to a continuing violation of the Constitution. ... Accordingly, Kelly’s ex post facto claim purportedly states a continuing violation and is timely.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(B) supplies a one-year limitations period for § 1983 claims in Tennessee, but a continuing constitutional violation can keep a claim for injunctive relief timely.

Kelly v. Haslam · filed 2020-05-08(a)(1)(B)

This one-year statute of limitation period, however, will not bar a § 1983 claim seeking injunctive relief from the enforcement of a law that amounts to a continuing violation of the Constitution.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(B) supplies the one-year limitations period for ADA and Section 504 claims in Tennessee; allegations of continuing violations can prevent dismissal at the pleading stage.

Battle v. State of Tennessee · filed 2024-09-06(a)(1)(B)

The Sixth Circuit has held that ADA and Section 504 claims in Tennessee are governed by the state’s one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions. Straser v. City of Athens, Tenn., 951 F.3d 424, 427 (6th Cir. 2020) (citing Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(B); Hughes v. Vanderbilt Univ., 215 F.3d 543, 547 (6th Cir. 2000)). ... The court, therefore, will not dismiss any claims on that basis.

Section 28-3-104(a)’s one-year limitations period does not bar a challenge to the constitutionality of a penal statute.

Campbell v. Sundquist · filed 1996-01-26(a)

The appellants assert that the plaintiffs’ cause of action is barred by T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a), the one year statute *258of limitations for personal torts and malpractice actions. ... The plaintiffs contend that this argument fails not only because the defendants have failed to cite a single case in support of this argument, but also because there is no statute of limitations on challenging an unconstitutional penal statute. We agree.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) is a general one-year limitation for personal-injury actions; it does not bar an action brought in Georgia within Georgia’s two-year period.

Gray v. Armstrong · filed 1996-08-01(a)(1)

No such exception applies in the subject case, as the Tennessee statute of limitation is a general statute and the limitation is not included as a condition precedent in the statute which created the cause of action. Therefore, the general Tennessee statute of limitation creates no substantive right in the limitation period and does not preclude the bringing of the action in Georgia, consistent with Georgia’s two-year statute of limitation.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limit bars a tort claim filed in Arizona when Tennessee has the more significant relationship to the parties and occurrence and Arizona has no substantial interest in maintaining the claim.

DeLoach v. Alfred · filed 1998-03-17

The DeLoaches filed a motion for summary judgment based on the one-year statute of limitations for tort actions in Tennessee. Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104. ... We therefore conclude that, based on revised § 142 and the undisputed facts of this case, Tennessee’s one-year limitation provision applies and bars the complaint filed in Arizona on June 19,1996.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to file a retaliatory discharge claim after the claim accrues.

Clark v. HOOPS, LP · filed 2010-04-01

It is undisputed that Plaintiff was given notice of Defendant’s termination decision on June 5, 2006. On May 22, 2007 Plaintiff filed a Civil Warrant in the Court of General Sessions of Shelby County, Tennessee raising his retaliatory discharge claims. Plaintiff therefore filed suit within the one year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104’s one-year limitations period applies to tort claims arising from the loss of at-will employment because that loss is an injury to the person.

Sudberry v. Royal & Sun Alliance · filed 2009-02-17(a)(1)

Finding that Employee/Appellant did not sufficiently rebut the presumption of at-will employment and that, consequently, the one-year statute of limitations codified at TenmCode Ann. § 28-3-104 for injuries to the person is applicable, we affirm.

Section 28-3-104 applies a one-year limitations period to claims for loss of employment when the employment relationship is for an indefinite term or terminable at will.

Sudberry v. Royal & Sun Alliance · filed 2006-07-27(a)(1)

To the extent that Mr. Sudberry plead alternative claims that are based upon an employment relationship of an indefinite term or terminable at will, such claims are governed by the one (1) year period of Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring a retaliatory discharge claim, beginning when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know of the injury. Unequivocal oral notice of a termination decision can start that period before the termination takes effect.

Weber v. Moses · filed 1996-12-23

Weber sustained the injury he now alleges when Jefferson Pilot decided to terminate his sales manager contract effective August 31, 1992. Moreover, he became aware of the injury when he was orally advised in early August of Jefferson Pilot’s decision. Actual termination of the contract is nothing more than the consequence of Jefferson Pilot’s earlier decision. The statute of limitations, therefore, precludes Weber’s retaliatory discharge claim.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1) gives retaliatory discharge claims a one-year limitations period that begins when the employee receives unequivocal notice of a final termination decision.

Reed v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. · filed 1999-03-26(a)(1)

We first address Reed’s contention that the trial court erred in ruling that her claim for retaliatory discharge was barred by the one-year statute of limitations applicable to such claims. See Headrick v. Union Carbide Corp., 825 S.W.2d 424 (Tenn. App. 1991); T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(1) (Supp. 1990). ... Under these circumstances, we conclude that the trial court erred in ruling that the one-year statute of limitations had run by the time Reed filed this lawsuit on December 12, 1995.

Section 28-3-104 applies a one-year limitations period to retaliatory discharge claims.

Whitaker v. Whirlpool Corp. · filed 2000-03-16

The trial court dismissed Whitaker’s complaint as to these defendants because the action is barred by the one-year and/or three years statutes of limitations. T.C.A. § § 28-3-104 and 105 respectively. We agree with the trial court concerning this reason for dismissal except as to allegations of fraud. Thus, if we construe the complaint as a claim for retaliatory discharge, clearly the one-year statute of limitation bars the action.

Section 28-3-104 gives a TPPA retaliatory discharge claim a one-year limitations period that begins when the claimant knows or should know of the injury.

Gibbens v. OptumRx, Inc. · filed 2019-07-15

A retaliatory discharge claim under the TPPA has a one-year statute of limitations that accrues when the claimant knows or should know of the alleged injury.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring a libel action; when the alleged libel is in documents unavailable to the public, the period begins when the plaintiff knew or reasonably could have discovered it.

Watson v. Robert P. Fogolin, M.D. · filed 2010-04-01

To prevail on an action for libel, Mr. Watson would have to show that he was defamed by a written statement made by Dr. Fogolin to the ED and bring his cause of action within the one-year statute of limitations. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104. In cases such as the one at bar, where the alleged libel is contained within documents not available to the general public, the statute of limitations begins to run when the plaintiff knew, or with reasonable diligence could have discovered, that he had been defamed.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year to bring a libel claim; when defamatory information is separately disseminated, a new limitations period begins when each recipient receives it.

Greg Swafford,M.D. v. Memphis Individual Practive Association, Southern Health Plan, Inc., The Apple Plan · filed 1998-06-02

We hold that the gravamen of Dr. Swafford’s complaint is libel and that the one-year statute of limitations is applicable. We find that the “single publication rule” is not applicable under the facts of this case, and that each dissemination of the allegedly defamatory report gives rise to a separate cause of action. Any claim that may have arisen at the point of transmission of the information to the Data Bank or at the point of discovery is time-barred. As to claims arising after discovery, the limitations period for each cause of action commenced on the date of dissemination of the allegedly libelous information, i.e., the dates on which potential users received the report from the Data Bank.

A libel action must be filed within one year after it accrues; a publicly aired broadcast does not delay that period when the plaintiff had notice of it.

Ali v. Moore · filed 1998-06-16(a)(1)

An action for libel must be brought “within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued.” T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(l) (Supp.1997). ... Ali’s suit concerning the two America’s Most Wanted episodes filed against Fox on April 18, 1994, more than sixteen months after the second broadcast, is barred by the one-year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year from publication to file a libel action.

Thompson v. Keith Wilson, Ted Como, Becky Campbell and Michelle Wilder · filed 2004-01-26

The statute of limitations applicable to an action for libel1 is one year from the date of publication.

Section 28-3-104(b)(1) gives a claimant one year from discovery of an alleged product defect to file a products liability claim.

Mark Jay Scott McLean v. Bourget's Bike Works, Inc. · filed 2005-10-07(b)(1)

Products liability claims must be filed within one year from the date of the “personal injury, not the negligence or sale of a product.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(b)(1) (2000). ... Because Mr. McLean filed his lawsuit against Bourget’s within one year from discovering the motorcycle’s alleged defect, the trial court erred by dismissing his products liability and Tennessee Consumer Protection Act claims on the grounds that they were not timely filed.

Section 28-3-104 provides a one-year limitations period for libel claims.

Ward v. Knox County Board of Education · filed 2012-04-23(a)(1)

Accordingly, the Court cannot find that plaintiffs’ claim for libel against Kerr is time barred, either under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-305 or Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104, both of which provide for a one year statute of limitations.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) requires a libel action to be filed within one year of the injury and its known source.

Roan v. Ensminger · filed 2018-02-15(a)(1)(A)

The R & R is also ADOPTEDand APPROVEDinsofar as it recommends that Roan's state-law wrongful termination, breach of contract, and defamation claims be dismissed. Those claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. ... Thus, a claim for slander would be barred if not filed within six months ( T.C.A. 28-3-103 ) and an action for libel would be barred if not filed within one year of the injury and its known source. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) ; Redwing v. Catholic Bishop for Diocese of Memphis , 363 S.W.3d 436, 458 (Tenn. 2012).

Section 28-3-104 gives a plaintiff one year after a libel claim accrues to file suit.

DSG Commercial ECO Cleaning Systems, Inc. v. DHL EXPRESS (USA), INC. · filed 2024-02-09

Accordingly, the Court construes the Complaint to allege libel, meaning Plaintiff had one year from the time the cause of action accrued in which to file suit.

Section 28-3-104(a)(1)(A) gives libel claims a one-year limitations period.

Doe v. Bucciarelli · filed 2025-05-22(a)(1)(A)

Libel, or written defamation, is governed by a one-year limitations period. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1)(A). ... Claims based on these statements are not time-barred.

Section 28-3-104(a)(4) gives a plaintiff one year to bring a claim for the statutory penalty for an insurer’s bad faith refusal to pay.

Wynne v. Stonebridge Life Insurance · filed 2010-02-22(a)(4)

Tennessee Code Annotated § 28-3-104(a)(4) provides a one-year statute of limitations period applicable to “actions for statutory penalties.” The bad faith statute is penal in nature.

Actions for statutory penalties have a one-year limitations period, which the discovery rule does not toll for lack of knowledge of the law.

Williams v. State · filed 2004-01-23(a)(4)

In pertinent part, Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104 provides: “The following actions shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued: ... (4) Actions for statutory penalties.... ” TenmCode Ann. § 28-3-104(a) (2003). ... He filed his claim against the State in November of 2002, well beyond the one-year statute of limitations. Thus, Plaintiffs claim is barred by the statute of limitations unless it is tolled for some reason. ... The discovery rule cannot be used to toll the statute of limitations because of Plaintiffs claimed lack of knowledge about the law.

The one-year period for actions for statutory penalties does not apply to Cable Act claims analogous to conversion.

Kingvision Pay Per View, Ltd. v. Wilson · filed 2000-01-12(a)(4)

Defendant urges the court to adopt a one-year statute of limitations that applies to actions for statutory penalties, ... T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(4), while plaintiff claims that T.C.A. § 28-3-105, the three-year limitations period for conversion, is more appropriate. ... Plaintiffs claim set forth in its complaint is, by its nature, analogous to a claim for conversion, and thus the three-year statute of limitations in T.C.A. § 28-3-105 should apply.

The one-year limitations period for statutory penalties permits recovery of penalties that accrue daily during the year before the complaint is filed.

Snake Steel, Inc. v. Holladay Construction Group, LLC · filed 2021-06-30(a)(1)(C)

We affirm the Court of Appeals’ holding that, provided Snake Steel can establish that Holladay was required to deposit the subcontractor retainage funds into an escrow account, the statute of limitations does not preclude Snake Steel from recovering the $300 per day penalty, commencing 365 days before Snake Steel filed its complaint in this cause, up to the day Holladay tendered the retainage to Snake Steel.

Section 28-3-104 applies a one-year limitations period to intentional infliction of emotional distress claims because they assert injuries to the person.

Greene v. Mercedes-Benz, USA · filed 2020-01-31

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress is a tort asserting “injuries to the person,” and the one-year statute of limitations applies. T.C.A. § 28-3-104; Leach v. Taylor, 124 S.W.3d 87 (Tenn. 2004).

Section 28-3-104 gives abuse-of-process claims a one-year limitations period.

Lloyd v. Midland Funding, LLC · filed 2016-01-22

The district court properly held that Lloyd’s state-law claim for abuse of process is time barred under Tennessee’s applicable one-year statute of limitations.