AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 13; Title 16; Title 29; Title 39; Title 67 and Title 68, relative to nuisances.
HB1050 expands Tennessee’s nuisance law by creating a new category of “prima facie evidence” of a nuisance per se when repeated criminal incidents occur on the same parcel of property within specified time periods. The bill covers repeated incidents involving sexually related, drug-related, assaultive, firearm-related, and certain property-related or juvenile-related charges. Once the statutory threshold is met and notice is given to the property owner, the state may seek nuisance remedies in court.
The bill also adds a second-stage enforcement tool. If a nuisance has already been found and abated, but another qualifying incident occurs on the same property, that later incident can again serve as prima facie evidence of a nuisance. In that circumstance, the court may also award statutory damages of $1,000 to $50,000 to nearby property owners in the same ZIP code who claim their property values were harmed by the continued nuisance. The act takes effect July 1, 2025.
HB1050 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 29, the state’s nuisance statutes, and adds definitions for several categories of criminal charges tied to nuisance enforcement. It gives state officers and other authorized persons a clearer statutory basis to pursue abatement actions against properties associated with repeated criminal activity, while also creating a potential damages remedy for neighboring property owners. The bill excludes several regulated facilities and programs, including healthcare providers, substance use treatment and recovery residences, DUI schools, mental health and health department facilities, education-approved facilities, and correctional treatment programs.
The bill appears to have been generally well received and advanced with strong support through the legislative process. It passed the House Civil Justice Subcommittee, the House Judiciary Committee, and the House floor by wide margins, and it passed the Senate on third consideration without opposition. The vote history suggests broad agreement on the bill’s overall goal of strengthening nuisance enforcement against repeat criminal activity on private property.
The main points of potential contention are the breadth of the nuisance triggers and the effect on property owners, landlords, and nearby residents. The bill ties nuisance findings to repeated arrests, citations, or grand jury true bills for a wide range of offenses, which could raise concerns about overbreadth, due process, or the burden placed on property owners for conduct by unrelated individuals. At the same time, the bill includes explicit exemptions for healthcare, treatment, education, and correctional programs, indicating concern that legitimate service providers not be swept into nuisance enforcement.