WPC! # VUNa % 0(w@4 1 0l@ 0D 0J 0T: 0^ 0h 0rT 0| B 0J 0 1u` 0d U>9B)wDC AMU*0 Z{gO1lv~{ D3 B,vI 0@ AO\ 0Dq D/ B HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ stPuDvUwxgy eӀobF"3|x((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 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`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd-!C << G<  9p`(Arial  !#d#  ##   YYY FILED#X March20,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.#AppellateCourtClerk  q !#d#   $       Rule10(CourtofAppeals).MemorandumOpinion .(b)TheCourt,withconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase. E !#d#   $       Wealsonotethat,althoughtheHusbandsvaluationswereconsistentlylowerthanthoseofDuke,inmostinstancestheirvaluationswerewithin$1,000or$2,000ofoneanother. !#d#   $       TheWifewasexperiencingatemporarylayoffatthetimeoftrial. b !#d#   $       TheHusbandtestifiedthattherentalbusinesswasoperatingataloss;however,thetrialcourtcouldhavedisbelievedthistestimony.WenotethattheHusbandlivesinoneoftherentalhouseswitharoommatebutdoesnotchargetheroommaterent.Wealsonotethat,attheposttrialhearingonattorneysfees,itwasrevealedthattheWifehaddiscoveredaUnionPlantersBankaccountcontainingover$6,000whichtheHusbandhadnotrevealedattrial.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'h++++'dxd dStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .   ݛ\RA'\` ` pX\RA'\7F<Xdd7 @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE,WESTERNSECTION@ ATJACKSON@ _______________________________________________________  ) ROSEMARIEERIKACASTEEL,  ) GibsonCountyChanceryCourt ) No.H3427̀Plaintiff/Appellee. ) ) Hon.GeorgeR.Ellis,ChancellorVS. )  ) C.A.NO.02A019606CH00136 WHEELERRAYCASTEEL,  )  ) AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED ̜R"$!A1-j|$`  `@RߛDefendant/Appellant. ) ) OPINIONFILED: HaroldF.Johnson ,Jackson,Tennessee CarolJohnsonMagee ,Memphis,TennesseeForDefendant/Appellant. JamesF.Butler ,SPRAGINS,BARNETT,COBB&BUTLER,Jackson,TennesseeForPlaintiff/Appellee.______________________________________________________________________________@ MEMORANDUMOPINION %   ______________________________________________________________________________  ` ` X      FARMER,J.  DefendantWheelerRayCasteel(theHusband)appealsthefinaldecreeofdivorceenteredbythetrialcourtwhichdissolvedthepartiesmarriage,distributedtheirrealandpersonalproperty,andorderedtheHusbandtopaytheexpenses,includingattorneysfees,incurredintheseproceedingsbyPlaintiff/AppelleeRosemarieErikaCasteel(theWife).Weaffirm. Theparties27yearmarriageendedin1995whentheWifewasgrantedadivorceuponthestipulatedgroundoftheHusbandsinappropriatemaritalconduct.Priortotrial,thepartiesresolvedallissuesrelatingtothedivisionofhouseholdgoodsandfurniture,andthepartiesthenstipulatedtoanequaldivisionoftheirremainingproperty. Theprimaryissueattrial,therefore,wasthevaluationofvariousrealpropertiesjointlyownedbytheparties.TheWifepresentedthetestimonyofJamesDuke,alicensedrealestateappraiserwhosequalificationsasanexpertwitnesswerestipulated.Dukebasedhisvaluationsoftherealpropertiesoncomparablesalesinthesameorsimilarcommunities. TheHusband,ontheotherhand,presentedhisownopiniontestimonyastothevaluesoftheproperties.TheHusbandtestifiedthathisvaluationswerebasedonthepricesforwhichhepurchasedtheproperties,aswellashispersonalknowledgeofthepropertiesandtheirrespectivecommunities.TheHusbandalsoopinedthatthetotalvalueofthepropertiesshouldbereducedby$6,590.93incityandcounty advalorem taxeswhichwereassessedagainstthepropertiesinOctober1995.Sincethepartiesseparation,theHusbandhadreceivedalloftherentalincomefromtheproperties,totaling$37,580;however,theHusbandhadnotpaidtheassessedtaxesatthetimeoftheDecember1995trial. TheonlyissuesonappealrelatetothevaluationofthepartiesjointlyownedrealpropertiesandtheWifesentitlementtoalimony insolido forherexpensesandattorneysfees.Specifically,theHusbandcontendsthatthetrialcourterred(1)infailingtogiveconsiderationtotheHusbandstestimonyregardingthevalueofthepartiesjointlyownedrealproperties;(2)infailingtoconsidercityandcounty advalorem taxesasanindebtednessencumberingthepartiesjointlyownedrealproperties;and(3)inorderingtheHusbandtopay,asalimony insolido ,theWifesexpensesincurredintheseproceedings,including$6,562.50inattorneysfees. WefirstconcludethatthetrialcourtdidnoterrinvaluingthepartiesrealpropertiesbaseduponthetestimonyoftheWifesexpert,JamesDuke.Asbestwecandiscern,theHusbandsargumentonappealappearstobethathisowntestimonyastothevalueoftherealpropertieswasmoreprobativethanthatofDukeand,thus,thatthetrialcourtshouldhavegivengreaterweighttotheHusbandstestimony.Anyconflictintestimony,however,wasforthetrialcourttoresolve.ThetrialcourtadoptedDukesvaluationsoftheproperties,inpartpersuadedbythefactthatDukewasa disinterestedthirdparty.Absentrealevidencecompellingacontraryconclusion,thetrialcourtsdecisionresolvingthisconflictisbindingontheappellatecourt. Hudsonv.Capps ,651S.W.2d243,246(Tenn.App.1983).Inthisregard,werejecttheHusbandsargumentthathisowntestimonycompelledaresultdifferentthanthatreachedbythetrialcourt. &    Underthecircumstancesofthiscase,wealsorejecttheHusbandsargumentthattherealpropertiesvaluesshouldhavebeenreducedbytheamountofassessed advalorem taxeswhichremainedunpaidatthetimeoftrial.Inthefinaldivorcedecree,thetrialcourtindicatedthatithadconsideredthisargument,butthecourtruledthatanyentitlementtoacreditfortheassessedtaxes,aswellasothercreditsclaimedbytheHusband,wereoffsetbytheWifespriorcontributionofa$25,000inheritancetothemaritalestate.Further,afterthepartiesseparation,theHusbandreceivedalloftherentalincomefromtheproperties,andhewassolelyresponsibleforthebusinessofrentingthepropertiesandpayingallnecessaryexpenses.Basedonthesefactors,thetrialcourtproperlydeclinedtogivetheHusbandcreditfortheunpaidtaxes. Finally,weaffirmthetrialcourtsawardofexpensesandattorneysfeestotheWife.Thedecisiontoawardattorneysfeesinadivorceactionrestswithinthesounddiscretionofthetrialcourtandwillnotbedisturbedonappeal,unlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstsuchadecision. Houghlandv.Houghland ,844S.W.2d619,623(Tenn.App.1992).TheHusbandcontendsthatthetrialcourtinthiscaseerredinorderinghimtopayexpensesandattorneysfeesincurredbytheWifebecausetheHusbandlackedtheabilitytomakethesepayments.Specifically,theHusbandpointsoutthathewasunemployedatthetimeoftheDecember1995trial. '   ׀Wenote,however,thatintheyearpriortothedivorce,theHusbandearnedapproximately$26,800fromhisemploymentasanindustrialengineerwithDouglasandLomasonand,further,thatsincethepartiesseparation,theHusbandalonehasreceived$37,580inrentalincomefromthepartiesjointlyownedrealproperties. (   ׀Inlightofthesefactors,aswellasthepartiesstipulationthattheHusbandwasatfaultinthebreakupofthemarriage,weconcludethattheevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsdecisionorderingtheHusbandtopaytheWifesexpensesandattorneysfees. Storeyv.Storey ,835S.W.2d593,59798(Tenn.App.1992).Wifesrequestthatweremandthiscasetodetermineanawardofattorneysfeesincurredbyheronappealisdenied. Thefinaldivorcedecreeenteredbythetrialcourtisaffirmed.CostsofthisappealaretaxedtotheHusband,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.` ` X ________________________________ FARMER,J.______________________________HIGHERS,J.(Concurs)______________________________LILLARD,J.(Concurs)