WPCf 4Vj 0(yw@ 0J 0T3 0^ 0h 0rM 0| 0; 0 1uQ 0d UB* %l U6r U> B) DC AMR U*  v~ B^v{ D3N 0@ AO 0D D/ BIڃ"3|x($ DDDEDEDDӀ2 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<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX<  9p`(Courier New<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d7Border 1dd- C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d#  ""   YYY FILED"X July31,1997CecilCrowson,Jr."AppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'h dStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .         \RA'\\RA'\7*OXXdd7R!# A1-j|`  `@Rߛ ̀@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTION DANNYDANIEL,    )C/ANO.03A019703CH0096      ) PlaintiffAppellant,   )HAMILTONCHANCERY      )v.      )HON.HOWELLN.PEOPLES,      )CHANCELLORDONNADANIEL,    )      )AFFIRMEDAS DefendantAppellee.  )MODIFIEDMARVINBERKE,BERKE,BERKE&BERKE,Chattanooga,forPlaintiffAppellant.PHILLIPC.LAWRENCE,FEENEY&LAWRENCE,PLLC,Chattanooga,forDefendantAppellee.@ OPINION         Franks.J.  InthisdivorceactiontheTrialJudge,attheconclusionoftheevidentiaryhearing,madethefollowingfindings:0 0  Mr.Danielhasanincomeof$1,500aweek,$6,450amonthgross.Healsohas$2,000amonththatcomesinasrentalincomefromsomerealpropertythatheowns.0 0  Histaxreturnfromlastyearshowsanadjustedgrossincomeof$201,200.Thats$16,766amonth.0 0  IfMrs.Danielmakes$1,600amonth,hestillmakes,basedonlastyearstaxreturn,tentimestheincomethatshehas.0 0  Thepartieshavebeenmarriedsince1979.Mrs.Danielhasworkedasanurseuntilherchildwasborn.ShehasreturnedtoworkingonthePRNbasisasanurse.HerincomesinceFebruarythe22nd,1996hasbeen$6,800.0 0  Assumingthatsamerateofincome,thecourtwillorderthePlaintiff,DannyDaniel,topayheralimonyattherateof$1,500permonth.0 0  ...0 0  Becauseofthegreatdisparityintheamountofincomebetweentheseparties,Iassumethesepartiesaregoingtomakeequaldivisionoftheirassetsandtheirproperty,sotheCourtwouldstilldeemappropriatetoawardMrs.Danielattorneysfeesasalimony.  DannyDanielhasappealedandhasraisedtheseissues:0 0 1.0 DidtheCourterrinorderinghusbandtopayalimonyinfuturoattherateof$1,500permonth,eventhoughthewifehasnoneedforthatamountandrehabilitationwaspossible?0 0 2.0 DidtheCourterrinorderingthehusbandtopaythewifesattorney$5,770astheirattorneysfeeswhenthewifehadsufficientresourcestopaythefeesherself?  TheamountofalimonyawardediswithinthesounddiscretionoftheTrialJudge.Houghlandv.Houghland,844S.W.2d619(Tenn.App.1992).Appellantpointsoutthatneedandabilitytopayarethe mostcriticalfactorstobeconsideredindeterminingwhethertoawardalimony.Lloydv.Lloyd,860S.W.2d409(Tenn.App.1993).Weagree,buttheCourtisrequiredtoconsiderallthefactors,ifapplicable,setforthinT.C.A.365101(d).Moreover,thespousesabilitytopayisanimportantconsiderationfortheCourtinsettingalimony.McCartyv.McCarty,863S.W.2d716(Tenn.App.1992).Therecordestablishesthatthewifeiseconomicallydisadvantaged,anditisappropriatetoprovidealimony.However,thewifetestifiedthatsheisemployedparttimeandhasnodesiretoworkfulltime.Sheisanurseandcapableofmakingasubstantialincome.Sheisaspeciallytrainedinendoscopies,colonoscopies,andgasoscopies.Shetestifiedthat,ifnecessary,shecouldberetrainedasafloornursewithinaperiodofayear,andhassubstantialassetsfromthedivisionofmaritalproperty.  CourtshavebeendirectedbytheGeneralAssemblythatwhenthereisafindingthataspouseiseconomicallydisadvantagedrelativetotheotherspouse,thatthedisadvantagedspouseberehabilitated wheneverpossible.T.C.A.365101(d)(1).ItappearstheTrialJudgebasedtheawardofpermanentalimonyuponthedisparityintheincomeoftheparties.However,whentheelementsenumeratedinT.C.A.365101(d)areappliedtothefactsofthiscase,rehabilitativealimonyisappropriate.Accordingly,wemodifytheTrialCourtsjudgmenttoreclassifythealimonyasrehabilitativeandtobepaidintheamountof$1,500.00permonthforfiveyears.  Thetrialjudgeisvestedwithwidediscretioninallowanceofattorneysfeesandexpenses.SeeElliottv.Elliott,825S.W.2d87(Tenn.App.1991),andasinthiscase,wheretheawardofattorneysfeesisanalimonyaward,theTrialCourtwasrequiredtotakeintoaccountthefactorsenumeratedin365101(d).WefindfromourreviewthattheTrialCourtproperlyexercisedhisdiscretioninmakingtheawardoffees.Accordingly,weaffirmthejudgmentoftheTrialCourt,asmodified,andϜremandatappellantscost.Ӝ      ________________________      HerschelP.Franks,J.̜CONCUR:̜___________________________DonT.McMurray,J..̜___________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.