The COVID Project
The record
- Jurisdiction
- Tennessee (Middle District of Tennessee; Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County) · Tennessee
- Level
- Court
- Authority
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 65; Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905); reviewing Metro Public Health Department Order 9 (Ex. MET-BNA-010) and citations by the Metro Beer Permit Board and Metro Health Department
- Issued
- 2020-07-14 July 14, 2020
- Effective
- 2020-07-14
- End
- n/a (order) (read as 2020-09-30)
- In force
- July 14, 2020 to Sept. 30, 2020
- Quarters
- 2020 Q3
2020 Q22020 Q32020 Q42021 Q12021 Q22021 Q3
- Limitation types
- Business closureCapacity limitAlcohol and bars
- Addressees
- specified businesses (bars, limited-service restaurants and restaurants in Davidson County); by its reasoning, every business subject to a Tennessee health order
- Character
- adjudication
- Collection
- Standing duties: Tennessee DUT-TN
Operative words
During a health pandemic, the court's power of review is not entirely negated, but it is limited to asking whether the governing authorities have taken action in 'an arbitrary, unreasonable manner' or through 'arbitrary and oppressive regulations.'... Plaintiffs did not demonstrate that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims relating to... Health Order 9.
Penalty
Citations by the Metro Beer Permit Board and the Metro Health Department under Health Order 9 continued; the order recites them
What it required
Left in force, against Nashville bars and restaurants, Health Order 9's closure of bars and its operating conditions, and left the Metro Beer Permit Board and Metro Health Department free to continue prosecuting the citations issued against Kid Rock's Big Ass Honky Tonk and Honky Tonk Central; the court applied the Jacobson standard, quoting the Sixth Circuit that 'the police power retained by the states empowers state officials to address pandemics such as COVID-19 largely without interference from the courts.' Character as recorded: adjudication (order_penalty layer).
Retrieval noteOfficial court document from GovInfo (Doc. 59, filed July 14, 2020, eight pages). The Attorney General relied on this order in Opinion No. 20-14 (Ex. DUT-TN-015). The Tennessee Court of Appeals' decision in State ex rel. Tulis v. Lee (challenging the Governor's use of title 58 rather than sec. 68-5-104) was identified on CourtListener but could not be retrieved (CourtListener and the Tennessee courts' site refused fetching); it is not relied on.