ÿWPCw 'G0H»®œ}ùRkÐ㯠þº²w]‹/ÍÆ ž• â4–Õº7ªûì-8#(ÜŒ%4IÕ7ÃÛ`_ÌZí»êοUÚÌU¹ä R=²Á]„jEniéWód•¶L]p¥ ŒV…±Z~ñÝ›¼Ø¹F øB=©P<[^†7®1E1$QNüGBÌÖ«Jeçì[Ê42e‡öÞ8‡Å®t=?êðÆ¾šùB¦1›ÊSæý“ɬÙõC3 0°,ïGùg™òA…?¢4’{×pÃù1ÚPa.SŠvöŽTÕ†‰Ç§"å_BCQfñò'ÉéG\J™³ð§ùÿR=‹÷ñJd/¡vÉáU›à¦€ec3±–ÜQÙ4t…-íÞ€ÃÔiS?9â^b´õQc¹wËÖa;¥ÆŒgo,žã”Úd»¹¨GFç›Âh$B¼<܄ćÀWÓnÇÝ¥CŽP?Píj—¢Þphx.”–•ÃVk‹º¶/»R5½m§ KùîðV5@Ñ­mKм¥™µÇ{5ǽŠÞÏ[QÞšêÿ{„SŒWòõb|ɈÀo3RÛFUpëû–{,/·@Û€[3O+UÆXã4F7—XX(C‰Ì­‚ `# @U NK %™ 0(Ÿw@Ç4  * D bL :T NŽ 0P ^ à ì mî 0° µ U:· · · · · · · · · · · · · AQñ ÆB 0D  0DL L D/ B¿ BÜ D3ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù ù 0D,,,,,,,,, Ap D?ñ BG0˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ Y Z e[ D\ ] ^ D_ ` a Ó€k ©yË&tttttt3|xk waiver- ù- 0Ñ#€O@Xÿÿd#ÑÑ € Ñ((3/Q$««Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ d ÔÝsï&ˆÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(`(2ÇŸ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑÑà Ø àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó øÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X4$XXXÔÔ€« XX4$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X4$X« ÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€20,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular!"T$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝT^yúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñZ ñ›ñZ ñÔ_ÔÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ‡¼œ5¼XXÔÓ'€Ð‡Xè“X°œX'ÓÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ  ÑÑ€ foÑœñk ññk ññk ñña ñœña ñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` 8ttxP,°ð  rßñk ñña ñña ñ›à@& & êàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñk ññk ñà@‚‚(êàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌó óñk ñœßt€ )>.*jxb` `€€@EVé` 8ttxPŽÌð  tß›ñk ñÌJAMES€MARCUS€CARR€and€wife,à  à)Ð Ü, ÐMARY€GENE€CAMPBELL€CARR,)Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)ÌÓ6€ü(‚X˜‘X€Ð‡Xè“X6Óà Ø àPetitioners/Appellants,à  à)à  àAppeal€No.Ð  \ Ðà Ø àà  à)à  à01A01„9807„CH„00402Ð  l Ðv.à Ø àà  à)Ð , | Ðà Ø àà  à)à  àSumner€County€ChanceryÐ <Œ  ÐJOHNNY€ALLEN€MOORE,€à  à)à  àNo.€97„A15Ð Lœ  Ðà Ø àà  à)Ìà Ø àRespondent/Appellee.à  à)Ð l¼  Ðà Ø àà  à)ÌÌÔ#†X¶{X¼¼œ5R#ÔÔ‡»6»XX¶{ÔÓ  ÓCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ œì ÐÌAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURTÌFOR€SUMNER€COUNTYÌAT€GALLATIN,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€E.€GRAY,€PRESIDING€ÌÓ9°,X‚Xì“X€ü(‚X˜‘X9ÓÌÓ  ÓÌÌLESLIE€B.€Ô_ÔMCWILLIAMSÔ_ÔÌSUITE€3900€6100€BUILDINGÌCHATTANOOGA,€TENNESSEE€37411ÌÌÔ#†X¶{X»»6u#ÔÔ‡¼œ5¼XX¶{ÔATTORNEY€FOR€PETITIONERS/APPELLANTSÐ Œ$Ü ÐÌÌCAROL€ANN€BARRONÌ264€THIRD€AVENUEÌDAYTON,€TENNESSEEÌÌATTORNEY€FOR€RESPONDENT/APPELLEEÌÌÓ  ÓÌò òAFFIRMED€ANDó ó€ò òREMANDEDó óÐ ,/|*( ÐÓ  ÓÌÌà Ø àà ¼ àÌà Ø àà ¼ àà è àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌCANTRELL,€J.ÌCAIN,€J.ÌÌña ñÑ foÑÑ7€¶{XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ ÑÑ  ÑÑ foÑÑ#€O@Xÿÿd#ÑÑ € ÑÑ  Ñña ñÐ à:0639 ÐÑ foÑÑ7€¶{XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ ÑÑ  Ñña ñÑ foÑâ  âÑ7€FXXdìXXdì7ÑÑ€ Ñâ  âÑ  Ñña ñÔ_ÔÓÓÓ  ÓòòÔ#†X¶{X¼¼œ5ˆ#ÔÔ‡°(°XX¶{ÔOPINIONóóÐ ° ÐÓ  ÓÔ#†X¶{X°°( #ÔÓ€ÓÓ9°,X°4ì“X°,X‚Xì“X9ÓÔ€¼œ5¼XX¶{Ôà  àJames€Marcus€Carr€and€his€wife€Mary€Gene€Campbell€CarrÐ T¤ Ð("Appellants")€€commenced€the€underlying€action€by€filing€a€petition€for€adoptionÏof€the€latter's€minor€child,€M.C.M.€€The€petition,€which€alleged€that€James€€MarcusÏCarr€acquired€custody€of€the€child€upon€his€marriage€to€M.C.M.'s€mother,€œñ[ ñMary›€Gene›ÏCampbell›€Carr,ñ[ ñ›€soughtÏto€terminate€€the€parental€rights€of€M.C.M.'s€father,€Johnny€Allen€MooreÏ("Appellee").€€The€trial€court€initially€terminated€Mr.€Moore's€parental€rightsÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„102€for€failure€to€pay€child€support€for€moreÏthan€four€months€immediately€preceding€the€filing€of€the€petition€for€adoption.€ÏHowever,€after€considering€Mr.€Moore's€motion€to€alter€or€amend€the€judgment,Ïthe€trial€court€retracted€that€decision€and€rejected€Appellants'€petition.€€AppellantsÏappeal€the€trial€court's€refusal€to€terminate€Appellee's€parental€rights,€asserting€twoÏerrors.€€For€the€following€reasons,€we€affirm.Ì€€à  àJohnny€Allen€Moore€and€Mary€Gene€Campbell€Carr€are€the€biologicalÐ tÄ Ðparents€of€M.C.M.€€At€the€time€of€M.C.M.'s€birth€in€1992,€they€were€married€andÏresiding€together.€€After€several€acrimonious€separations,€they€divorced€in€1994Ïin€Hamilton€County,€Tennessee.€€The€initial€divorce€decree€granted€€Mrs.€CarrÏprimary€custody€and€ordered€Mr.€Moore€to€pay€$250€per€month€in€child€support.€ÏHowever,€on€July€24,€1995,€the€trial€court€ordered€Mr.€Moore€to€pay€weekly€childÏsupport€of€$64€plus€a€5%€clerk's€fee€to€be€automatically€deducted€from€his€wagesÏby€his€employer.€€The€court€also€ordered€Mr.€Moore€to€pay€directly€to€Mrs.€CarrÏ$547.71€in€arrearages€at€the€rate€of€$5€per€week.€Ìà  àWhen€Appellants€married€in€1996,€Mrs.€Carr€and€M.C.M.€moved€to€theÏNashville€area.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Mrs.€Carr€filed€a€motion€in€Hamilton€CountyÏseeking€€modification€of€the€existing€court„ordered€arrangements€for€picking€upÏand€delivering€M.C.M.€for€visitation€with€Mr.€Moore.€€Mr.€Moore€testified€that€heÏunsuccessfully€requested€Mrs.€Carr's€counsel€to€reschedule€the€hearing€on€theÏmotion.€€€After€Mr.€Moore€failed€to€attend€the€May€1996€hearing,€the€HamiltonÏCounty€Circuit€Court€€decreed€that€Mr.€Moore€would€pick€up€and€deliver€M.C.M.Ïfor€visitation€at€a€gas€station€in€Hendersonville,€Tennessee,€one€and€one€half€hoursÏfrom€Mr.€Moore's€Hamilton€County€residence,€until€a€second€hearing€was€held.Ìà  àThe€Hamilton€County€Circuit€Court€held€the€second€hearing€in€JuneÏ1996.€€Mr.€Moore€appeared€òòpro€seóó€and€attempted€to€explain€that€driving€toÐ ¼9 5@ ÐHendersonville€for€visitation€presented€an€intolerable€burden,€forcing€him€toÏarrange€child€care€for€his€three€other€children€as€his€only€vehicle€had€a€single€seatÏand€lacked€the€proper€restraints€necessary€to€transport€all€his€childrenÏsimultaneously.€€Mr.€Moore's€argument€resulted€in€an€order€terminating€hisÏvisitation€until€he€got€"his€mind€straightened€out."Ìà  àAfter€the€issuance€of€that€order,€Mr.€Moore's€contact€with€M.C.M.Ïdecreased.€€He€called€M.C.M.€in€September,€ñW ñseveralñW ññX ñthreeñX ññY ñ€ñY ñ€times€in€November,€andÏtwice€in€December.€€When€he€requested€visitation€around€Christmas,€Mrs.€CarrÏinformed€him€that€M.C.M.€already€had€plans€with€her€family.€€Ìà  àIn€November€1996,€Mr.€Moore€was€laid€off€from€his€job.€€The€final€Ï$134.40€child€support€payment€made€through€his€employer€was€sent€November€Ï12.€€Mr.€Moore€testified€that€he€did€not€mail€the€next€support€payment€to€Mrs.ÏCarr€because€arrearage€checks€he€sent€her€œñ\ ñin€ñ\ ñOctober›€and€November€had€beenÏreturned€with€the€notation,€"Return€to€Sender,€Address€Unknown."€€Instead,€heÏbegan€purchasing€money€orders€for€his€son's€child€support€and€setting€them€asideÏrather€than€sending€them€to€Mrs.€Carr's€previous€address.€€At€trial,€Mrs.€CarrÏadmitted€that€she€moved€four€times€during€1996€and€failed€to€provide€Mr.€MooreÏwith€forwarding€addresses.Ìà  àWhen€Appellants€filed€the€underlying€petition€for€adoption€in€SumnerÏCounty€Chancery€Court€on€March€26,€1997,€alleging€that€Mr.€Moore€willfullyÏabandoned€his€son€by€failing€to€visit€or€pay€child€support,€the€Chancellor€initiallyÏterminated€Mr.€Moore's€parental€rights€and€granted€Mr.€Carr's€request€to€adoptÏM.C.M.€€The€Chancellor€premised€this€disposition€on€a€finding€that€Mr.€MooreÏhad€failed€to€support€or€make€reasonable€payments€toward€support€of€M.C.M.€forÏfour€(4)€consecutive€months,€thereby€abandoning€his€son.€€The€ChancellorÏdeclined€to€find€that€Mr.€Moore€willfully€failed€to€visit€his€son€when€visitation€hadÏbeen€terminated€by€the€Hamilton€County€Circuit€Court.Ìà  àMr.€Moore€moved€to€alter€and€amend€the€judgment,€arguing€that€theÏChancellor€had€miscalculated€the€time€between€his€last€payment€and€œñ] ñthe€ñ] ñdate›€theÏpetition€was€filed.€€Mr.€Moore€asserted€that€the€petition€was€filed€on€March€26,Ï118€days€after€the€child€support€was€due€and€payable.€€He€calculated€the€numberÏof€days€in€the€statutory€four€(4)€month€period€at€œñ^ ñ$ñ^ ñ121.75.›Ìà  àThe€Chancellor€granted€Mr.€Moore's€motion€and€vacated€the€order€ofÏadoption,€finding€that€the€four€(4)€month€period€had€not€expired.€€The€ChancellorÐ H9˜4B Ðbased€this€conclusion€on€findings€that€the€gross€amount€of€the€child€support€Mr.ÏMoore€paid€from€September€1,€1995€to€November€21,€1996€was€$4,435.20€and€theÏgross€amount€due€from€September€1,€1995€to€November€30,€1996€was€$4,368.ÏThe€Chancellor€reasoned€that€Mr.€Moore's€last€child€support€payment€onÏNovember€12,€1996,€as€applied,€would€have€made€the€child€support€currentÏthrough€the€first€week€of€December,€less€than€the€statutorily€mandated€four€(4)Ïmonths.€Ìà@¦¦-êàI.ˆÌÓ€Óà  àAppellants€argue€that€the€Chancellor€erred€in€reversing€the€decision€toÏterminate€Mr.€Moore's€parental€rights.€€They€argue€that€the€statutory€time€periodÏshould€be€measured€from€November€12,€the€date€of€Mr.€Moore's€last€child€supportÏpayment.ÌÓ€– Óà  àOur€review€of€the€trial€court's€factual€findings€is€òòde€novoóó€with€aÐ ð@ Ðpresumption€of€correctness€unless€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€ÏTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13€(d).€€That€deference€is€not€applied€to€issues€of€law€whichÏreceive€plenary€review.€€òòGanzevoort€v.€Russellóó,€949€S.W.2d€293,€296€(Tenn.Ð ¸ Ð1997).Ìà  àBefore€termination€of€parental€rights€is€permissible,€the€grounds€thereforÏmust€be€established€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„¼113€(c)€(1)€(Supp.€1998).€€In€addition,€the€parental€rights€termination€statuteÏrequires€a€finding€that€termination€is€in€the€child's€best€interest.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€36„1„113€(c)€(2)€(Supp.€1998).€€Abandonment€is€one€of€the€statutory€grounds€forÏtermination.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„113€(g)€(Supp.€1998).€€In€this€context,Ïabandonment€means:€ÌÓ€Óà8  àFor€a€period€of€four€(4)€consecutive€months€immediatelyÏpreceding€the€filing€of€a€proceeding€or€pleading€to€terminateÏthe€parental€rights€of€the€parent(s)€or€guardian(s)€of€the€childÏwho€is€the€subject€of€the€petition€for€termination€of€parentalÏrights€or€adoption,€that€the€parent(s)€or€guardian(s)€either€haveÏwillfully€failed€to€visit€or€have€willfully€failed€to€support€orÏmake€reasonable€payments€toward€the€support€of€the€child.Ð  Ð  Ð  ÐÔ_ÔÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„1„102€(1)€(A)€(Supp.€1998).€€Ìà  àThe€record€shows€that€on€July€24,€œ1995ñ_ ñ,ñ_ ñ›€the€Hamilton€County€CircuitÏCourt€ordered€Mr.€Moore€to€make€weekly€child€support€payments€of€$67.20,Ð Ð9 5< Ðwhich€included€a€5%€clerk's€fee.€€The€gross€amount€of€child€support€Mr.€MooreÏpaid€from€September€1,€1995€to€November€12,€1996€was€œ$4,435.20ñ` ñ.ñ` ñ›€€The€grossÏamount€of€child€support€due€from€September€1,€1995€to€November€30,€1996€wasÏ$4,368.€€€Mr.€Moore's€employer€made€a€$403.20€payment€on€his€behalf€on€July€8Ïand€$268.80€payments€on€his€behalf€on€August€1€and€28,€and€October€1€and€29.€ÏThe€final€payment€by€the€employer€was€for€$134.40€on€November€12.€€TheseÏfigures€indicate€that€according€to€the€pattern€previously€adopted€by€the€parties,€Mr.ÏMoore's€child€support€payments€were€current€through€the€first€week€of€December,Ïcutting€short€the€requisite€four€(4)€month€time€span€calculated€from€March€26.€€€Ìà  àWhile€Appellants€may€dispute€the€method€used€to€calculate€payments,Ïit€was€their€burden€to€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€Mr.€MooreÏfailed€to€pay€child€support€for€the€statutory€period.€€òòSee€State€v.€Ô_ÔDefrieceÔ_Ôóó,€937Ð ` ÐS.W.2d€954,€961€(Tenn.€App.€1996).€€"The€clear€and€convincing€standard€imposesÏa€heightened€burden€on€those€seeking€to€terminate€the€rights€of€a€natural€parent.€ÏTo€meet€this€standard,€€a€€party€must€go€beyond€the€mere€threshold€of€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence:ÌÓÓà8  àClear€and€convincing€evidence€eliminates€any€serious€orÏsubstantial€doubt€concerning€the€correctness€of€theÏconclusions€drawn€from€the€evidence.€€It€should€produce€inÏthe€fact„finder's€mind€a€firm€belief€or€conviction€with€regardÏto€the€truth€of€the€allegations€sought€to€be€established.ÓÓÐ  Ð  Ð  ÐòòÔ_ÔO'DanielÔ_Ô€v.€Messieróó,€905€S.W.2d€182,€188€(Tenn.€App.€1995)€(citations€omitted)."€Ð -`(& ÐòòId.óó€€€We€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€Appellants€failed€to€meet€their€burden.€Ð 0/€*( Ðà@-êàII.ˆÌà  àAppellants€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Mr.€MooreÏdid€not€willfully€fail€to€visit€his€son€for€four€(4)€months€before€the€petition€forÏadoption€was€filed.€€They€maintain€Mr.€Moore€could€have€returned€to€court€at€anyÏtime€and€requested€the€reinstatement€of€his€visitation€privileges.Ð Ð9 52 Ðà  àAppellants€bore€the€burden€of€establishing€€that€Mr.€Moore's€failure€toÏvisit€Ô_ÔM.C.M.Ô_Ô€was€willful€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSee€id.óó€€€In€light€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€Hamilton€County€Circuit€Court's€order€terminating€Mr.€Moore's€visitationÏrights,€we€cannot€say€the€Chancellor€erred€in€finding€that€Mr.€Moore's€failure€toÏvisit€Ô_ÔM.C.M.Ô_Ô€was€not€willful.€Ìà  àAccordingly,€the€Chancellor's€refusal€to€terminate€Johnny€Allen€Moore'sÏparental€rights€and€denial€of€Appellants'€petition€for€adoption€are€affirmed€and€theÏcase€is€remanded€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€arise.€€€€€Costs€on€appeal€areÏtaxed€to€the€Appellants,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ìà  àà ¼ àà è àÌà  àà ¼ àÌÓÓà  àà ¼ à_______________________________Ìà  àà ¼ àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ________________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE€(Ô_ÔM.SÔ_Ô)ÌÌÌ________________________________________ÌWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEÌÌ