WPCo `R8e?2ˊ= a@7,8Ѹl`Z r7婗AZ\ ѐ46Cr: {$.wr[,ET AgU:^WswP=єrMVXNv4YJ,j?EBz07jhF.Vq# d֌6ppHH<ωuM=5^\,Ad=t^>%‚K!qY>P>: 9\ڨWi]놵[ØަYzbc8]~V#[`RNarx؝<}lFQ&C1&M=Co W4ٌϮmGҋK[ڂ¹N9inLjZZ4[B72&tM# 6UNA % 0(w@4 UN(fvaxf 0l 0Da> R D/Q  U: h h AQ  0D 0D" 0Df f B  B D3 iXHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ OUPQRSTUVWӀaF&N3|xa(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularTABLE A((3$ !      0  (#$  0  TABLE B  $    1    Althoughtheappraisersreportwasnotadmittedintoevidence,itwasmarkedasan  exhibittoMs.Willistestimonyforidentificationpurposesonly.((' dxd ""  XT XXX XXT    Ad FILEDXT X   May13,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regular  !"#$C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1   dP Pd&&&&'dxd )&&&&&&B:s0  !  WNNWTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T',XXX' aWr )<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP  rWaaaaWWaat )>.*jx` `@Ec` 8ttxP tߛa@O O INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE,@$ATNASHVILLE   @. . _______________________________________________________  ) RICHARDEVERETTCOLLINS ,  )  CoffeeCountyChanceryCourt 8    )  No.97258 ( x ЀPlaintiff/Appellant.  )  d   )VS.  )  C.A.No.01A019808CH00433  <    ) RACHELE.WILLIS ,  )     )̀Defendant/Appellee.  )     )______________________________________________________________________________FromtheChanceryCourtofCoffeeCountyatManchester HonorableJeffreyStewart,Judge  <  A.ThomasMonceret ,MONCERET&JOHNSON,Knoxville,Tennessee < AttorneyforPlaintiff/Appellant. H.ThomasParsons ,PARSONS&NICHOLS,Manchester,Tennessee  AttorneyforDefendant/Appellee.OPINIONFILED: AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED  $h"   FARMER,J.  &,"%  CRAWFORD,P.J.,W.S. :(Concurs) ($'  LILLARD,J. :(Concurs)O )$( OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ,;|6; OQP3,X` X,XX3PQRQ6,X` X,XX6QRSR6,X` XX,XX6RSS0,X` X,XX0STTU  ӜUV XXXX ` RichardEverettCollinsappealsanorderofthedivorcecourtvaluinganddistributing  thepartiesmaritalproperty.Additionally,RachelE.WillisarguesthatMr.Collinsappealisfrivolous,thusentitlinghertorecoveranawardforattorneyfeesincurredindefendingtheappeal.Forthereasonssetforthbelow,weaffirmtherulingofthetrialcourtanddenyMs.Willisrequestforattorneyfees.@! ProceduralHistory  @   ` Mr.CollinsandMs.WillisweremarriedinNovemberof1993andresidedtogetheruntiltheirseparationinJuneof1997.InJuneof1998,thetrialcourtgrantedadivorcetothepartiesonthestipulatedgroundsofirreconcilabledifferences,valuedthepartiesmaritalproperty,distributedthepartiesmaritalproperty,andallocatedthepartiesmaritaldebt.Afinaldecreeofdivorce,whichincorporatedthecourtsruling,wasenteredinJulyof1998.Thecourtsvaluationanddistributionofthepartiesmaritalpropertyissummarizedasfollows:*} & Lddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#},< dd ,< dd , dd +     MaritalProperty +!4!" && +Value +!4! " && +PartytoWhom 4!! PropertyisAwarded 0&$$"t""   && 0FordTrucks(2) +!##& +$20,800.00 +!#$& +Mr.Collins +!#%& +FordCar +!,%| && +$10,000.00 +!,%| '& +Ms.Willis +!,%| (& +Home,7Acres +!&")& +$100,000.00 +!&"*& +Ms.Willis +!&"+& +TrailerandTools +!4(#,& +$3,000.00 +!4(#-& +Mr.Collins +!4(#.& +BedroomSuite +!)%/& +$2,500.00 +!)%0& +Mr.Collins +!)%1& +CrackerBarrelStock +!<+&2& +$150.00 +!<+&3& +Mr.Collins +!<+&4& +HouseholdItems +!,(5& +$750.00 +!,(6& +Mr.Collins +!,(7& +HouseholdItems +!D.)8& +$1,500.00 +!D.)9& +Ms.Willis +!D.):& +Ms.Willis401(k) +!/+;& +$10,500.00 +!/+<& +Ms.Willis +!/+=& +BoatandComputer +!L1,>& +$8,000.00 +!L1,?& +Mr.Collins +!L1,@& +Total +!2 .A&& +$157,200.00 +!2 .B&& +/%#2 .C && / ValueofMaritalPropertyAwardedtoMr.Collins: p $35,200.00   x   400D ValueofMaritalPropertyAwardedtoMs.Willis: p $122,000.00 5 1E  Additionally,thecourtsrulingwithrespecttotheallocationofthepartiesmaritaldebtis 94I summarizedasfollows: p;6K ЇI*} &Ld d< dd < dd dd & (#(#},< dd ,< dd , dd +    EncumberedMaritalProperty +!D" && +AmountofDebt +!T" && +PartybyWhom T DebtisAssumed +!D" && +FordTrucks(2) +!x& +$18,900.00 +!x& +Mr.Collins +!x & +FordCar +! L & +$14,000.00 +! L & +Ms.Willis +! L & +Home,7Acres +!  & +$89,000.00 +! & +Ms.Willis +! & +BoatandComputer +! T& +$5,500.00 +! T& +Mr.Collins +! T& +MBNA +! & +$6,000.00 +! & +Ms.Willis +! & +MasterCard +! \ & +$3,000.00 +! \ & +Ms.Willis +! \ & +Amoco +! & +$400.00 +! & +Ms.Willis +! & +Total +!d&& +$136,800.00 +!d&& +/%#d  && / TotalMaritalDebtAssumedbyMr.Collins:   p $24,400.00   $t TotalMaritalDebtAssumedbyMs.Willis:   p $112,400.00 d   Thus,pursuanttothetrialcourtsruling,Mr.Collinsreceivedmaritalpropertyvaluedat$35,200.00andassumed$24,400.00ofthemaritaldebt.Itfollows,then,thatthenetvalueofthemaritalpropertydistributedtoMr.Collinsis$10,800.00.Ms.Willisreceivedmaritalpropertyvaluedat$122,000.00andassumed$112,400.00ofthemaritaldebt.Accordingly,thenetvalueofthemaritalpropertydistributedtoMs.Willisis$9,600.00.@ ValuationofMaritalProperty  %d 0  ` Priortothepartiesmarriage,Ms.Willispurchasedanewhomefor$94,000.00.Shortlythereafter,shediscoveredthatthehousewasstructurallydefectiveandinneedofextensiverepair.Consequently,Ms.Willisfiledanactionagainstthebuilderseeking$27,500.00indamages.Thelawsuitwassettledfor$20,000.00and,aftercostsandattorneyfeeswerepaid,Ms.Willisultimatelyreceived$13,000.00.Shethenplacedapproximatelyonehalfofthesettlementproceeds($6,500.00)intoaseparatebankaccountwiththeintentionthatthedepositedfundswouldlaterbeappliedtowardtheexpensesofrepairingthehouse.Mr.Collinsisaselfemployedgeneralcontractor.Duringthemarriage,Mr.Collinsmadesubstantialimprovementstothepartieshome,contributinghisownlaboraswellasmaterialsthatotherwisewouldhavebeenusedinthecourseofhiscontractingbusiness. ;6H  ` Attrial,thepartiesdisagreedregardingthefairmarketvalueoftheirhome.AccordingtoMs.Willis,shereceiveda1997taxassessmentnoticeindicatingthatthevalueofthehousewas justunder$100,000.00.Approximatelyeightmonthspriortotrial,thehousewasappraised. #  1      ׀Basedinpartonthisappraisal,Ms.Willisestimatedthat,onthedatethattheparties P  separated,thevalueofthehousewasapproximately$100,000.00.Shefurthertestified,however,thatitsvalueonthedateoftrialwasapproximately$105,000.00to$110,000.00.Ms.Willisthenindicatedthat,ifshedecidedtoplacethehouseonthemarket,shewouldlistthepropertyat$105,000.00butwouldhopetosellitfor$100,000.00.Mr.Collinsdeniedthatthefairmarketvalueofthepartieshomewas$100,000.00.ContrarytoMs.Willisestimate,Mr.Collinstestifiedthat,atthetimeoftrial,thehomewasworthapproximately$144,500.00. ` Initsruling,thetrialcourtcommentedthat thetestimonygivenbyMs.Willisismorecredibleinlightofallthecircumstancesastothevaluationoftheproperty.ThecourtthenadoptedMs.Willisestimateregardingthefairmarketvalueofthepartieshome.Onappeal,Mr.Collinsarguesthatthetrialcourtsvaluationofthispropertywasinerror.Wedisagree.Thetrialcourtwascalledupontomakeafactualdeterminationthatnecessarilyrequiredthecourttoevaluatethecredibilityofwitnesses.Thecourthadanopportunitytoobservethemanneranddemeanorofthewitnessesastheytestifiedandthuswasinthebestpositiontojudgetheircredibility.UndertheTennesseeRulesofAppellateprocedure,findingsoffactmadebyatrialcourtareentitledtoapresumptionofcorrectnessandmustbeupheldunlesstheyarecontrarytothepreponderanceoftheevidence. See T.R.A.P.13(d).Whenanissuehingesonwitnesscredibility,however,wemaynot 0*%( reverseatrialcourtsfactualfindingsunless,otherthanthewitnessesowntestimony,thereisclearandconvincingevidenceintherecordtothecontrary. SeeThompsonv.CreswellIndus.Supply, -@), Inc. ,936S.W.2d955,957(Tenn.App.1996)(quoting TennesseeValleyKaolinCorp.v.Perry ,526 / +. S.W.2d488,490(Tenn.App.1974)).Intheinstantcase,Mr.Collinsfailedtoproduceanappraisaloranyotherevidenceestablishingthatthefairmarketvalueofthepartieshomewas$144,500.00.Thus,wefindnoerrorwithrespecttothetrialcourtsvaluationofthispieceofproperty. P726 @ DistributionofMaritalProperty    ` Thetrialcourtisauthorizedtomakeanequitabledistributionofthepartiesmarital p property. See Tenn.CodeAnn.364121(a)(1)(1996).Althoughthedistributionmustbe P  equitable,thecourtisnotrequiredtodividethepartiesmaritalpropertyequally. SeeCohenv. 0  Cohen ,937S.W.2d823,832(Tenn.1996); Wattersv.Watters ,959S.W.2d585,591(Tenn.App. `  1997); Bookoutv.Bookout ,954S.W.2d730,732(Tenn.App.1997).Additionally,wenotethat @  trialcourtsareaffordedagreatdealofdiscretionwhendividingpropertyupondivorce. SeeFisher   v.Fisher ,648S.W.2d244,246(Tenn.1983); Bookout ,954S.W.2dat732; Wadev.Wade ,897  S.W.2d702,715(Tenn.App.1994); Kochv.Koch ,874S.W.2d571,579(Tenn.App.1993); Loyd  v.Loyd ,860S.W.2d409,411(Tenn.App.1993).Consistentwiththisgeneralrule,thedistribution p ofmaritalpropertymadebythetrialcourtintheinstantcaseisentitledtoapresumptionofcorrectnessandmaynotbereversedunlessitiscontrarytothepreponderanceoftheevidence. See 0 Wade ,897S.W.2dat715; Loyd ,860S.W.2dat411; Barnhillv.Barnhill ,826S.W.2d443,450 ` (Tenn.App.1991);T.R.A.P.13(d). ` Onappeal,Mr.Collinscontendsthatthetrialcourtfailedtoequitablydividethepartiesmaritalproperty.Specifically,Mr.Collinsarguesthat,totheextentthattheseassetsincreasedinvalueduringthemarriage,heisentitledtoashareofthepartieshomeandMs.Willis401(k)retirementaccount.Indeterminingwhetherthetrialcourtequitablydividedthepartiesmaritalproperty,wemustfirstconsiderwhethertheincreasedvalueofthehomeandthe401(k)accountqualifyasmaritalproperty.Theterm maritalpropertyisdefinedbysection364121asfollows:8 `  Maritalpropertymeansallrealandpersonalproperty,bothtangibleandintangible,acquiredbyeitherorbothspousesduringthecourseofthemarriageuptothedateofthefinaldivorcehearingandownedbyeitherorbothspousesasofthedateoffilingofacomplaintfordivorce,exceptinthecaseoffraudulentconveyanceinanticipationoffiling,andincludinganypropertytowhicharightwasacquireduptothedateofthefinaldivorcehearing,andvaluedasofadateasnearasreasonablypossibletothefinaldivorcehearingdate. ` x` x 8 `  Maritalpropertyincludesincomefrom,andanyincreaseinvalueduringthemarriageof,propertydeterminedtobeseparatepropertyinaccordancewithsubdivision(b)(2)ifeachparty