This sworn and notarized statement must "declare that the petition's allegations are true to the best of the petitioner's knowledge." Cason v. Little, No. W2007-01910-COA-R3-CV, 2008 WL 2065194, at *3- 4 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 15, 2008).

It is well settled that the "sworn to" language found at [Tennessee Code Annotated Section] 27-8-106 requires that all petitions for writs of certiorari be verified by an affidavit; otherwise, neither the lower court, nor the appellate court would obtain jurisdiction over the petition. Courts have consistently held that the failure of the petitioner to verify the petition as required by the Tennessee Constitution and the Tennessee Code is proper grounds for dismissal.Cason v. Little, No. W2007-01910-COA-R3-CV, 2008 WL 2065194, at *3-4 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 15, 2008). As further explained by this Court:

, whereas verification requires a statement accompanying the petition to, "'declare that the petition's allegations are true to the best of the petitioner's knowledge.'" Id. at 275 (quoting Cason v. Little, No. W2007-01910-COA-R3-CV, 2008 WL 2065194, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 15, 2008)). In addition, the statement must be sworn to in front of one of the persons designated in Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-8-106.

This Court has likewise explained that the "sworn and notarized statement accompanying the petition [for writ of certiorari] must declare that the petition's allegations are true to the best of the petitioner's knowledge." Cason v. Little , No. W2007-01910-COA-R3-CV, 2008 WL 2065194, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 15, 2008) (citing Adams v. Tenn. Dep't of Corr. , No. M2005-00471-COA-R3-CV, 2007 WL 1574277, at *2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 13, 2007) (in turn citing Bowling v. Tenn. Bd. of Paroles , No. M2001-00138-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 772695, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2002) )). As such, a purported verification that does not establish the truth of the petition's contents will not suffice.

The statutory scheme governing both types of writs provides that a writ can be issued only when "supported by oath or affirmation", and that the petition can be sworn to before the court clerk, a judge, or a notary, and must state that it is the first application for the writ. Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-8-104 and 106; see also Campbell v. Little, 2009 WL 1362306 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 14, 2009); Cason v. Little, 2008 WL 2065194 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 15, 2008)("It is well-settled that the `sworn to' language found at T.C.A. § 27-8-106 requires all petitions for writs of certiorari be verified by an affidavit; otherwise, neither the lower court, nor the appellate court would obtain jurisdiction over the petition.") Moreover, the Tennessee Constitution also mandates that a writ of certiorari be supported by an oath or affirmation. See Cason. The case law consistently holds that the failure of the petitioner to verify the petition as required by the Constitution and the statute is proper grounds for dismissal, as the court does not obtain jurisdiction without a properly verified petition.

Courts have consistently held that the failure of the petitioner to verify the petition as required by the Tennessee Constitution and the Tennessee Code is proper grounds for dismissal. Cason v. Little, No. W2007-01910-COA-R3-CV, 2008 WL 2065194, at *3-4 (Tenn.Ct.App. May 15, 2008) (citations and footnote omitted). Thus, Campbell's failure to verify his petition is grounds for dismissal.