Tennessee Senate Bill SB0835

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Engrossed: 3/10/25
• Enrolled: 4/8/25
• Passed: 4/21/25
• Chaptered: 4/29/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 5; Title 27, Chapter 1 and Title 57, Chapter 1, relative to recovery of costs.

Summary

SB0835 amends Tennessee law to allow a judge, hearing officer, or administrative judge to award actual and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to a person or entity that prevails in certain administrative actions involving the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission (the commission). The fee award applies when the commission brings an administrative action against a party, or when a party successfully challenges the commission’s actions. The bill is framed as a recovery-of-costs measure and applies notwithstanding conflicting law. In practical terms, the bill creates a statutory path for prevailing parties in commission-related administrative disputes to seek reimbursement for litigation expenses. It does not create a mandatory fee award in every case, but it authorizes the decision-maker to grant fees and costs when a party prevails, which may affect how administrative enforcement actions and challenges are litigated going forward.

Impact

The bill adds a new subsection to Tennessee Code Annotated section 57-1-213 and modifies the legal framework governing administrative proceedings involving the commission. It expands the authority of adjudicators in those cases to award attorney’s fees and costs, potentially shifting some financial risk to the commission when its actions are unsuccessful. The measure may influence enforcement strategy, settlement decisions, and access to administrative review for regulated persons and entities.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the legislative process. It passed the Senate Judiciary Committee 9-0, then cleared the Senate floor 29-0 on third consideration, and later passed the House 96-0. The unanimous votes suggest general agreement that prevailing parties in these administrative disputes should have a mechanism to recover costs.

Contention

No committee debate or transcript excerpts were provided, and the recorded votes show no opposition. Based on the text, any potential point of contention would likely center on whether authorizing attorney’s fees against the commission could discourage agency enforcement or, conversely, whether it is a fair remedy for parties who successfully defend against or challenge commission actions. However, the available record does not show active disagreement from any identified lawmakers or stakeholders.