ÿWPC …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ B)Ç DCð AM3U*€ëªv~•vÓ Bæ D3 0@6 AOvÆÅ 0D‹ D/Ï Bþ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ O P Q RS£TUDVDWÓ€cz!tÔtTÔô3|xc2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial áÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌò òOctober€3,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€!ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò d%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›à@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌDANA€œLYNNE€BURLESON,ó ó›à à)à àHenderson€County€Chancery€CourtÌà à)à àNo.€8618Ì€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.€A.€NO.€02A01„9601„CH„00021ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€ ";+'h|%` Å `€€Lß›à à)Ìò òMICKEY€DWAYNE€BURLESON,ó óà à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Henderson€County€at€Lexington.Ìò òHonorable€Joe€C.€Morris,€Chancellor€€ó óÌÌÌÌò òJames€F.€Butler,Ìó óSPRAGINS,€BARNETT,€COBB€&€BUTLER,€Jackson,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellant.ÌÌÌÌò òCarthel€L.€Smith,€Jr.ó ó,€Lexington,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òLILLARD,€J.€ó ó:€œ(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓ›œà àDefendant„Appellant,€Mickey€Dwayne€Burleson€(ð ðFatherðð),€appeals€the€trial€courtððsÏjudgment€denying€his€petition€to€modify€the€child€custody€provisions€of€the€partiesðð€final€divorceÏdecree.ÌÌà àThe€parties€were€divorced€in€July€1993€by€a€final€divorce€decree€which€incorporatedÏby€reference€the€terms€of€the€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement€(ð ðMDAðð).€€In€accordance€withÏthe€terms€of€the€MDA,€Plaintiff„Appellee,€Dana€Lynne€Burleson€(ð ðMotherðð),€was€awardedÏð ðabsolute€and€exclusive€custodyðð€of€the€partiesðð€two€minor€children€and€the€Father€was€awardedÏthe€marital€home.€€The€MDA€required€the€Mother€to€quitclaim€her€interest€in€the€marital€home€to€theÏFather€upon€his€payment€of€$8,700€to€the€Mother€for€her€equity€in€the€home.€€An€amendment€to€theÏMDA,€filed€the€same€day€the€divorce€decree€was€entered,€required€the€Father€to€ð ðprovideÏbabysitters€for€the€children€at€his€own€expense€in€lieu€of€direct€child€support€payments,€the€partiesÏagreeing€that€said€amounts€would€be€equal.ððÌÌà àIn€May€1994,€the€Father€filed€a€petition€to€change€custody€and€modify€the€finalÏdecree€of€divorce.€€At€the€evidentiary€hearing€held€in€February€and€March€1995,€the€Father€testifiedÏthat€the€Mother€moved€out€of€the€marital€home€after€the€partiesðð€divorce€but€that€the€children€did€notÏmove€with€her.€€Instead,€the€children€remained€in€the€marital€home,€where€the€Father€took€care€ofÏthem.€€The€Fatherððs€mother€(the€childrenððs€paternal€grandmother)€took€care€of€the€children€duringÏthe€day€while€the€Father€worked.€€The€Father€provided€the€children€with€their€basic€needs,Ïincluding€clothing€and€medical€expenses.€€The€Father€also€involved€himself€with€the€childrenððsÏclasses€and€activities,€but€the€Mother€did€not.€€ÌÌà àFather€further€testified€that€at€the€time€of€the€divorce,€the€Mother€was€working€theÍnight€shift.€€Pursuant€to€an€agreement€between€the€parties,€the€grandmother€began€watching€theÏchildren€at€night€while€the€Mother€worked.€€The€Mother€was€supposed€to€pick€up€the€children€afterÏher€shift€ended,€but€she€never€did.€€The€Mother€sometimes€called€from€work€to€see€about€pickingÏup€the€children,€but€half€of€the€time€she€failed€to€show€up€to€get€them.€€After€about€a€week,€theÏFather€began€picking€up€the€children€from€the€grandmotherððs€house€and€taking€the€children€homeÏwith€him.€€Ìà àThe€Mother€testified€that,€contrary€to€the€Fatherððs€testimony,€when€the€MotherÏmoved€out€of€the€marital€home,€the€children€moved€with€her€into€her€new€home.€€The€Mother€hasÏmoved€a€couple€of€times€since€the€divorce,€and€each€time€the€children€have€moved€with€her.€ÏPursuant€to€the€amendment€modifying€the€MDA,€the€Father€and€the€Mother€agreed€that€the€FatherÏwould€not€have€to€pay€child€support€if€the€grandmother€took€care€of€the€children€while€the€MotherÏworked€the€night€shift.€€Problems€with€this€arrangement€arose€because,€when€it€was€time€for€theÏMother€to€pick€up€the€children,€she€often€had€trouble€locating€them.€€The€Mother€admitted€that€thereÏwere€days€when€she€did€not€pick€up€the€children,€but€she€explained€that:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àWhen€I€would€go€to€pick€up€the€kids,€they€wouldnððt€beÏthere.€€One€would€be€here€and€one€would€be€somewhere€else.€ÏWhen€[the€Father]€took€them€to€his€house,€you€could€beat€on€theÏdoor.€€He€wouldnððt€come€to€the€door,€notes€on€the€door.ÌÌà àà à....ÌÌà8 àà àYou€could€call.€€There€wouldnððt€be€any€answer€one€day.€ÏYou€would€go€there€the€next€day.€€If€you€did€find€somebody,€oneÏwould€be€with€[the€Father]€and€one€would€be€[somewhere€else].€€ÌÌÓÓÌAt€the€time€of€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€Mother€no€longer€was€working€the€night€shift.€€ÌÌà àIn€June€1995,€the€trial€court€entered€a€judgment€denying€the€Fatherððs€petition€toÏchange€custody.€€In€its€judgment,€the€court€gave€the€following€reason€for€its€ruling:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àAs€stated€in€Open€Court,€the€Court€feels€that€a€[sic]€bothÍparents€in€this€cause€are€fit€and€proper€to€have€custody€of€theÏchildren,€and€it€appears€that€the€children€have€been€spending€a€greatÏdeal€of€time€with€each€one,€and€in€particular,€with€[the€Father]€andÏ[the€grandmother].ÌÌà8 àà àHowever,€the€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€there€has€not€beenÏa€material€change€of€circumstances€that€the€parties€did€not€agree€to,Ïwhich€was€convenient€to€[the€Motherððs]€work,€and€for€economicÏreasons€for€[the€Father].€[The€Mother]€agreed€for€[the€Father]€toÏbabysit€the€children€in€lieu€of€child€support,€and€she€agreed€for€theÏchildren€to€stay€with€[the€Father],€and/or€[the€grandmother],€whenÏshe€worked€the€night€shift.€€This€might€have€been€a€mistake€on€herÏpart,€but€not€enough€to€take€custody.ÌÌà8 àà àCustody€will€remain€with€[the€Mother],€and€[the€Father]€willÏpay€according€to€the€guidelines.€€ÌÌÓÓÌà àOn€appeal,€the€Father€presents€a€single€issue€for€our€review:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€[the€Fatherððs]Ïpetition€to€change€custody€and€modify€decree.€€ÌÌÓÓÌà àWe€review€the€custody€issue€presented€in€this€case€òòò òde€novoó óóó€upon€the€record,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact.€€ò òòòKoch€v.ÏKochó óóó,€874€S.W.2d€571,€575€(Tenn.€App.€1993);€T.R.A.P.€13(d).€€In€doing€so,€we€recognizeÏthat€ð ð[t]rial€courts€are€vested€with€wide€discretion€in€matters€of€child€custody€and€the€appellateÏcourts€will€not€interfere€except€upon€a€showing€of€erroneous€exercise€of€that€discretion.ðð€€ò òòòKochó óóó,Ï874€S.W.2d€at€575.ÌÌà àIn€a€custody€modification€proceeding,€the€comparative€fitness€analysis€of€theÏoriginal€custody€proceeding€is€no€longer€determinative.€€Instead,€the€non„custodial€parent€has€theÏburden€of€proving€a€material€change€in€circumstances€ð ðcompelling€enough€to€warrant€the€dramaticÏremedy€of€changed€custody.ðð€€ò òòòMusselman€v.€Acuffó óóó,€826€S.W.2d€920,€922€(Tenn.€App.Ï1991).€€Applying€the€foregoing€standard,€we€conclude€that€the€Father€has€failed€to€meet€this€burdenÏin€the€present€case.ÌÌà àThe€Father€contended€at€trial€and€on€appeal€that€a€material€change€in€circumstancesÏhad€occurred€in€that,€contrary€to€the€partiesðð€expectations€at€the€time€they€entered€into€the€MDA,€theÏFather€has€served€as€the€childrenððs€primary€care€giver€since€the€divorce.€€According€to€the€Father,Ïthe€children€have€continued€to€live€in€the€former€marital€home€with€the€Father€and€the€Father,€notÏthe€Mother,€has€continuously€provided€for€the€childrenððs€basic€needs.ÌÌà àBased€on€the€evidence€presented€at€the€hearing€below,€the€trial€court€found€that€anyÏchange€in€circumstances€resulted€from€the€partiesðð€agreement€and€did€not€warrant€the€remedy€ofÏchanged€custody.€€We€agree.€€The€amendment€to€the€MDA,€which€required€the€Father€to€provideÏbabysitters€for€the€children€in€lieu€of€direct€child€support€payments,€was€filed€the€same€day€theÏdivorce€decree€was€entered.€€The€Mother€testified€that,€pursuant€to€this€amendment,€theÏgrandmother€watched€the€children€at€night€for€a€period€of€time€during€which€the€Mother€wasÏassigned€to€the€night€shift.€€Although€this€arrangement€resulted€in€the€children€spending€a€great€dealÏof€time€with€the€Father€and€the€grandmother,€the€arrangement€did€not€constitute€a€change€inÏcircumstances€because€it€was€agreed€to€by€the€parties€at€the€time€of€the€divorce.€€ò òòòSee,€e.g.,ó óóó€ò òòòHallÏv.€Halló óóó,€1995€WL€316255,€at€*2€(Tenn.€App.€1995)€(indicating€that€change€in€custody€requiresÏmaterial€change€not€reasonably€foreseen€when€original€custody€decision€was€made).ÌÌà àIn€affirming€the€trial€courtððs€custody€decision,€we€note€that€much€of€the€evidenceÏwas€disputed€regarding€the€Motherððs€attempts€to€pick€up€the€children€from€the€Fatherððs€house€andÏthe€grandmotherððs€house.€€As€this€Court€recently€stated,ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àCustody€decisions€are€among€the€most€important€decisionsÏthat€courts€make.€€They€are€factually€driven€and€require€a€carefulÏbalancing€of€numerous€considerations.€€ò òòòNichols€v.€Nicholsó óóó,€792ÏS.W.2d€713,€716€(Tenn.€1990)[ò òòòoverruled€on€other€groundsÏby€Aaby€v.€Strangeó óóó,€924€S.W.2d€623€(Tenn.€1996)];€ò òòòRogeroÏv.€Pittó óóó,€759€S.W.2d€109,€112€(Tenn.€1988)[ò òòòoverruled€on€otherÏgrounds€by€Aaby€v.€Strangeó óóó,€924€S.W.2d€623€(Tenn.€1996)];Ïò òòòHolloway€v.€Bradleyó óóó,€190€Tenn.€565,€571,€230€S.W.2d€1003,Í1006€(1950);€ò òòòScarbrough€v.€Scarbroughó óóó,€752€S.W.2d€94,€96Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1988).€€Appellate€courts€understand€that€theseÏdecisions€often€hinge€on€subtle€nuances€in€the€partiesðð€demeanor€andÏcredibility,€and€we€are,€therefore,€reluctant€to€second„guess€trialÏcourts€who€have€observed€the€witnesses€and€assessed€theirÏcredibility.€€ò òòòGilliam€v.€Gilliamó óóó,€776€S.W.2d€81,€84€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1988).€€We€customarily€decline€to€disturb€custody€decisionsÏunless€they€are€based€on€a€material€error€of€law€or€unless€theÏevidence€preponderates€against€them.€€ò òòòHass€v.€Knightonó óóó,€676ÏS.W.2d€554,€556€(Tenn.€1984);€ò òòòEdwards€v.€Edwardsó óóó,€501ÏS.W.2d€283,€291€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973).ÌÌÌÌÓÓò òòòHalló óóó,€1995€WL€316255,€at€*2.€€We€conclude€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theÏtrial€courtððs€custody€decision€in€this€case.ÌÌà àThe€trial€courtððs€judgment€denying€the€Fatherððs€petition€to€change€custody€isÏaffirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Father,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓ` Ü` È“XÓÓÓà à___________________________________Ìà àFARMER€JÌ.ÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌLILLARD,€J.€(Concurs)Ì›