Tennessee Senate Bill SB1858

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/21/26
• Engrossed: 3/19/26
• Enrolled: 4/15/26
• Passed: 4/27/26
• Chaptered: 5/5/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 20, Chapter 18, relative to civil procedure.

Summary

SB1858 revises Tennessee’s special civil-procedure rules for certain actions covered by Title 20, Chapter 18. The bill changes how a qualifying case is assigned by requiring the filing party to notify the presiding judge of the judicial district, who then notifies the Tennessee Supreme Court. The Supreme Court must appoint a three-judge trial court panel to hear the case, with one judge selected from each grand division of the state to ensure geographic balance. The bill also changes venue rules for these covered civil actions by providing that venue may be in any county in Tennessee, notwithstanding the general venue statute and any other conflicting law. In addition, it extends the time period in Section 20-18-105(a) from 15 calendar days to 90 calendar days, giving parties substantially more time to act under that provision. The act takes effect July 1, 2026.

Impact

SB1858 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 20, Chapter 18, affecting the procedural handling of certain civil actions by centralizing judge selection through the Supreme Court, broadening venue options statewide, and lengthening a statutory deadline from 15 to 90 days. The practical effect is to alter where these cases may be filed and how they are assigned and managed in the trial courts, while preserving a three-judge panel structure with statewide regional representation.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received generally favorable support, passing the Senate Judiciary Committee 7-2 and advancing on the floor by 27-6 before final passage by a wider 75-20 vote. Those votes suggest broad bipartisan acceptance, though not unanimity, indicating some legislators had reservations about the procedural changes. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows support through the legislative process but limited detail on debate.

Contention

The main points of contention likely centered on the bill’s expansion of venue to any county in the state and the delegation of case assignment to a Supreme Court-selected three-judge panel, which can affect forum choice and litigation strategy. The extension of the deadline from 15 to 90 days may also have drawn scrutiny from members concerned about delaying proceedings or changing existing procedural expectations. The recorded nay votes in committee and on the floor indicate that some lawmakers opposed these changes, but the available materials do not identify specific arguments or sponsors of the opposition.