Rule 23.Class Actions
Last amended July 1, 2025 · Last verified July 2, 2026
Full Text of Rule 23
Advisory Commission Comments
Advisory Commission Comments [2004].
The amendment to Rule 23.03(1) abolishes ex parte class action certifications.
Advisory Commission Comments [2006].
The second and third sentences of Rule 23.05 are new. Objections can be made to attorney fees sought as part of a settlement.
Advisory Commission Comments [2007].
T.C.A. § 27-1-125 gives the Court of Appeals discretion to permit an appeal of a trial court's grant or denial of class action certification. Permission from the trial court is unnecessary
Advisory Commission Comments [2009].
The Tennessee Voluntary Fund for Indigent Civil Representation is established in Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-3-821.
Advisory Commission Comments [2025].
The prior rule allowed complete discretion to use residual funds for any purpose whatsoever, with only a notation that use for indigent representation was permitted. The prevailing view among legal scholars and courts is that use of residual funds should target some combination of programs that advance the class members' interests and/or programs that advance access to justice for indigent citizens. Some jurisdictions direct that residual funds should be used exclusively for the interests of the class members and only for indigent representation purposes if advancing the class members' interests is not feasible. See generally Me. R. Civ. P. 23(f)(2). Many jurisdictions direct that a prescribed percentage of the funds should be used to provide legal help to indigent persons, with the remainder paid to organizations that reflect the class's interests. See generally S.C. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2) (minimum 50% to access to civil justice activities or programs).
Amendment History
- Added by order entered January 8, 2009, effective July 1, 2009.
- amended by order filed December 16, 2024, effective July 1, 2025.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 23.01 sets four prerequisites before any class action can go forward: the class must be so numerous that joining every member individually would be impracticable; there must be questions of law or fact common to the class; the claims or defenses of the representative parties must be typical of the class; and the representatives must be able to adequately protect the class's interests. These four requirements work as threshold screens, and courts also expect a class to be defined precisely enough that its membership can readily be identified, and expect the named representatives to have a valid claim of their own rather than borrowed standing to serve as a stand-in for others.
Rule 23.02 identifies three kinds of maintainable class actions once those prerequisites are met, and the category a class fits into carries real consequences. Under the first, separate individual lawsuits would create a risk of inconsistent adjudications that establish incompatible standards of conduct for the party opposing the class, or would as a practical matter be dispositive of interests belonging to class members who are not parties. Under the second, the party opposing the class has acted on grounds generally applicable to the whole class, making classwide injunctive or declaratory relief appropriate. Under the third — generally the broadest category and the one most often used for damages claims — common questions predominate over questions affecting only individual members, and a class action is superior to other methods of resolving the controversy. Only this third category requires the court to direct notice to the class and to give members a chance to opt out.
Rule 23.03 requires the court to decide, as soon as practicable and never through an ex parte hearing, whether an action can proceed as a class action, and that determination can later be altered or amended. Rule 23.04 lets the court manage the case with orders addressing notice, the conditions placed on representative parties or intervenors, and similar procedural matters. Rule 23.05 requires court approval and notice to the class before a certified class action can be voluntarily dismissed or compromised, and it requires a formal motion, with notice to class members, whenever attorney fees are sought as part of a settlement — protections meant to guard against a settlement that serves class counsel more than the class.
Rule 23.06 sets separate requirements for a shareholder derivative action, including a verified complaint, proof that the plaintiff held shares at the time of the challenged transaction, and a detailed account of the efforts made — or the reasons none were made — to get the corporation's own directors or shareholders to pursue the claim first. Rule 23.07 extends comparable protections to actions brought by or against the members of an unincorporated association through representative parties. Rule 23.08 gives the court discretion over how to distribute any residual funds left over after a class settlement or judgment pays out approved claims, expenses, and fees, directing that leftover money toward purposes connected to the litigation or toward supporting access to the civil justice system for low-income Tennesseans.
Frequently Asked Questions
What has to be shown before a lawsuit can proceed as a class action?
Rule 23.01 requires numerosity (the class is too large for practical joinder), commonality (shared questions of law or fact), typicality (the representatives' claims are typical of the class), and adequacy (the representatives will adequately protect the class's interests).
Do all class members get notice and a chance to opt out?
Not always. Rule 23.03 requires notice and an opt-out opportunity only for a class certified under the third category in Rule 23.02 — where common questions predominate and a class action is superior to other methods. Classes certified under the first two categories do not carry that same notice and opt-out requirement.
Can a certified class action be settled without court involvement?
No. Rule 23.05 requires court approval before a certified class action can be voluntarily dismissed or compromised, along with notice to the class, and a separate motion process when attorney fees are sought as part of the settlement.
Advisory Commission Comments.
Rule 23 makes the class action available in all fields of civil litigation. The court is required to make an affirmative determination as to whether or not a class action is proper in any given set of circumstances; this determination is subject to alteration at any time prior to judgment on the merits. Criteria governing the court's determination are spelled out in detail. The rule seeks to secure to the courts and litigants the advantages of the class action while clothing the court with power to protect all members of the class against a miscarriage of justice.
23.06: Tenn. Code Ann. § 48-718 [repealed] contains the provisions of the General Corporation Act relating to shareholders' derivative suits. Rule 23.06 does not conflict with the provisions of Tenn. Code Ann. § 48-718 [repealed] and will not repeal any of its provisions. The Rule adds a provision, not found in the statute, requiring that the complaint contain an allegation that plaintiff is a holder of shares at the time of bringing the suit, but the Rule does not change the requirement that the plaintiff actually be a shareholder as of that time. The Rule adds a requirement that the complaint set out the reasons that plaintiff's efforts to obtain desired action from the directors or comparable authority were unsuccessful. The Rule adds a provision that the derivative action may not be maintained if it appears that the plaintiff does not fairly and adequately represent the interests of the shareholders or members similarly situated.