Home › Tennessee › Rules of Civil Procedure › Rule 42.02

Rule 42.02 Separate Trials

Rule 42. Consolidation: Separate Trials

← Previous Rule 42.01: Consolidation Next → Rule 43.01: Evidence at Trials

Rule Text

The court for convenience or to avoid prejudice may in jury trials order a separate trial of any one or more claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, or third-party claims, or issues on which a jury trial has been waived by all parties. For the same purposes the court may, in nonjury trials, order a separate trial of any one or more claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party claims, or issues.

Amendment history: [Amended by order effective July 1, 1997.]

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

A judge can decide to split up a case and hold separate trials for different parts of it. This can happen in cases with a jury or without one. For example, if a case has multiple claims or counterclaims, the judge might handle them one at a time instead of all together in one trial.

Judges usually do this for two main reasons. First, it can make the case easier to manage and move things along faster. Second, it can protect a party from being treated unfairly, like when hearing certain evidence all at once might confuse a jury or make it harder for them to judge each claim fairly.

This means your case might not be resolved in a single trial. Some issues could be decided first, while others wait for a later trial. The judge makes this call based on what seems fair and practical for everyone involved.

Committee Notes

Advisory Commission Comments.

42.01: Prior to the adoption of these Rules, statutes permitted consolidation of suits in certain types of cases, including suits involving (a) mechanics' and materialmen's liens, Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-11-132, (b) delinquent taxes, Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-5-2409, and (c) municipal annexation, Tenn. Code Ann. § 6-51-103. The Committee felt that the consolidation of actions or the hearing of them jointly should be encouraged in order to avoid unnecessary delay and expense and the duplication of effort.

42.02: This Rule allows the court, for convenience or to avoid prejudice, to order a separate trial of any one or more claims, cross-claims, counterclaims or third-party claims.

Advisory Commission Comments [1997]. Former constitutional concerns about a "right" to have a general jury verdict on all issues no longer exist in light of Ennix v. Clay, 703 S.W.2d 137 (Tenn. 1986).