WPC, %# U:! %[ 0aw@\4 0? 0D 0JB 0T 0^ 0hF 0r  0|& 0 0( 1u 0d- U*  v~v< BHP LaserJet 4/4MHPPCL5E,,,,0 ,  AZ"Arial RegularX($  HTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTXXXX7.XXdXXd7  eUDPE}X!3|x((3$ !  HTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TX*XXX7*XXdXXd7   `   0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  HR2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Arial  !#d#    H \RA'\#d#   $       Rule10(b)MemorandumOpinion.TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase.PtPtHHHV,(hh hd'0F Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva  d ! .     H \RA'\#Xd##Xd#  ݛ   Ӝ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEEASTERNSECTIONATKNOXVILLE   LYNNBERNICECARRAHER,  )      ) Plaintiff/Appellee   ) HAMILTONCIRCUIT       )v.      )      ) NO.03A019608CV00259MICHAELTHOMASCARRAHER, )       ) Defendant/Appellant  ) AFFIRMED%  ԛ AndrewBerkeandRonaldJ.Berke,Chattanooga,FortheAppellant.StevenM.Jacoway,Chattanooga,FortheAppellee.   MEMORANDUMOPINION           INMAN,SeniorJudge  Theplaintiffsemployerhadagenerousprofitsharingplantowhichtheplaintiffwasnotrequiredtocontribute.Thetrialjudgedeclinedtotreatthisfundasmaritalpropertybecausethe plaintiffdidntearnit,andthedefendantdidntcontributetoit. T.C.A.364121(b)(1)(A)definesmartialpropertytoinclude all...personalproperty..acquiredbyeitherorbothspousesduringthecourseofthemarriageuptothedateofthefinaldivorcehearingandownedbyeitherorbothspousesasofthedateoffilingofacomplaintfordivorce.Thevalueofanyvestedpension,retirementorotherfringebenefitsaremaritalproperty,asarecash,securitiesandothertangibleorintangibleassets.Aprofitsharingplanisclearlywithinthedefinitionofamaritalasset.Butinthecircumstancesofthiscase,weareunabletofindthattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment.Tenn.R.App.P.13(d.) Theappellees401(k)andprofitsharingplan,worth$42,000.00wasawardedtoher,whiletheappellantsretirementplan,ofanallegedpresentvalueof$17,000.00wasawardedtohim.TheCourtobservedthat ...wedontknowwhathispensionis.Itisfarmorethan$17,000.00,Mr.Berke. Onehalfoftheequityintheincreasedvalueoftheresidenceownedbyappelleebeforehermarriagewasawardedtotheappellant.ItisapparentthattheCourtconsideredthecircumstancesofthepartiescarefullyanddistributedthemartialassetsofaneightyearmarriageasequitablyaspossible. ThisisapropercaseforaffirmancepursuanttoTenn.R.App.P.10.     Costsareassessedtotheappellant.      __________________________________      WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:̜______________________________HoustonM.Goddard,PresidingJudge______________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,Judge ̜