Tennessee House Bill HB1419

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/4/25
• Refer: 3/10/25
• Refer: 3/17/25
• Refer: 4/8/25
• Engrossed: 4/14/25
• Enrolled: 4/23/25
• Passed: 5/21/25
• Chaptered: 6/4/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Chapter 232 of the Private Acts of 1953; as amended by Chapter 233 of the Private Acts of 1953; Chapter 164 of the Private Acts of 1955; Chapter 157 of the Private Acts of 1957; Chapter 276 of the Private Acts of 1961; Chapter 281 of the Private Acts of 1963; Chapter 12 of the Private Acts of 1967; Chapter 62 of the Private Acts of 1979 and Chapter 66 of the Private Acts of 1995; and any other acts amendatory thereto, relative to the general sessions court of Montgomery County.

Summary

HB1419 amends a series of private acts governing the General Sessions and Juvenile Courts of Montgomery County to create a fifth division of that court. The bill establishes a new Division Five judge position, gives that judge the same jurisdiction, powers, qualifications, compensation, and court terms as the existing judges, and provides for an initial appointment by the Montgomery County legislative body followed by election cycles beginning in 2026. It also requires the county to provide a separate courtroom, furnishings, supplies, and law-enforcement and clerk support for the new division. The bill also updates the county’s presiding-judge rotation rule so that the presiding judge will rotate among all five divisions every five years, rather than rotating only among the first three divisions every three years. In effect, the measure expands the structure and administrative capacity of Montgomery County’s local court system and revises the governing private acts to reflect the added judicial division.

Impact

HB1419 changes Montgomery County’s private court acts by adding a new General Sessions and Juvenile Court division and a corresponding judgeship, while also expanding the duties of the clerk’s office and county support obligations. The bill does not alter statewide court law generally, but it does amend local private legislation to increase judicial capacity, adjust presiding-judge rotation, and set the appointment and election schedule for the new office. Its practical effect is to require county-level action and resources if approved by the Montgomery County legislative body.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been received very favorably. It advanced through committee and floor action with unanimous or near-unanimous support, including 10-0 in the House Private Acts Committee, 19-0 in the House State & Local Government Committee, and 94-0 on consent calendar passage. The final motion to adopt also passed without recorded opposition. The voting pattern suggests broad agreement that the local court expansion was needed and noncontroversial.

Contention

There is little visible contention in the available record. The only substantive policy questions implied by the bill are whether Montgomery County should create and fund an additional court division and how the presiding-judge rotation should be structured across five divisions. Because the act takes effect only if approved by a two-thirds vote of the Montgomery County legislative body, local county officials are the main decision-makers on implementation, but no opposition or debate is reflected in the provided committee or vote history.