The Tennessee House of Representatives voted to adopt House Resolution 5, creating an ad hoc committee to receive and review a complaint filed by Reuben Dockery with respect to the “50 Third Representative District.” The action occurred on the floor after members suspended the rules to allow immediate introduction and consideration.

Representative Tim Morris moved that the rules be suspended for immediate introduction and consideration of House Resolution 5. The motion to suspend the rules was approved without objection. Clerk Scott then read the resolution’s caption: “a resolution to create an ad hoc committee to receive and review the complaint filed by Reuben Dockery with respect to the 50 Third Representative District.”

Speaker Pro Tempore Tim Marsh moved adoption of House Resolution 5. The chamber decided the question by voice vote; Speaker Pro Tempore Marsh declared the resolution adopted after the affirmation vote. The record on the floor shows no roll-call tally associated with the final adoption in the transcript; the outcome is entered as adopted by the House.

The resolution, as read on the floor, directs creation of a short-term ad hoc committee to take receipt of and review the named complaint. The transcript does not provide the complaint’s allegations, committee membership, deadlines for the committee’s report, or any specific investigatory procedures; those details are not specified in the meeting record.

Procedural notes: the motion to suspend rules and the subsequent adoption were recorded as floor motions and resolved during the same sitting. The resolution’s caption identifies Reuben Dockery as the complainant and specifies the affected district in the caption text shown on the record.

Next steps and limitations: the transcript records only the House’s creation of the ad hoc committee; it does not record any additional instructions, assigned members, reporting deadlines, or whether the committee’s work is subject to additional internal rules or external legal requirements. The House’s action establishes an internal mechanism to receive and review the complaint but does not itself make findings about the complaint’s substance.