ÿWPCÖ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU<Ýw@ 4Y m | 0l„ 0Dð {54 0Ji 0T³ 0^ 0he 0rÍ 0|? 0†» 0A 1uÑU,F 0drU,ÖU>B)@DCi AM¬ Bù D3U*I-s 0@ v~àvÓ^ AO1Æ€ 0DF D/Š B¹˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman Uî !"#Ó€/0;p‚ Bu ÿÔ,Ô3|x0((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó( 1$$¡¡ÑÑÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÑ  ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ7€ÎâXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÔ‡TRÈTXXÔÓpÓ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d))))'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Arial #Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌò òApril€23,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€+ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA:Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA:Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€$$X„d&ÓÑ#€$$Xd#ÑÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÑ7€TXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÒ  ÒÒ „ Òà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌà àà à€€Ï________________________________________________ÌÌò òROBIN€MOORE€DAY,€ó óÌÌà àPlaintiff„Appellee,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àShelby€Equity€No.€D19586„1ÌVs.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.A.€No.€02A01„9410„CH„00242ÌÌò òFRANK€L.€DAY,ó óÌÌÙ€€ÙßL€(,';+'h|<7` Å `€€Lßà àDefendant„Appellant.Ì___________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@ àFROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OFÏSHELBY€COUNTYÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€NEAL€SMALL,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àJames€D.€Causey,€Jean€E.€Markowitz€of€MemphisÌà@ àFor€AppelleeÌÌà@ àRobert€D.€Meyers,€Spicer,€Flynn€&€Rudstrom€of€NashvilleÌà@ àFor€AppellantÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óóóÌÌà@ àOpinion€filed:ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEÌÌHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEó óÌÌÌÑ  ÑÓÓ›œ›à àFrank€L.€Day,€petitioner„appellant,€appeals€from€the€order€of€theÏtrial€court€denying€his€petition€to€modify€a€final€decree€of€divorce.Ìà àPetitioner€and€Robin€Moore€Day,€respondent„appellee,€wereÏdivorced€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€The€FinalÏDecree€of€Divorce€was€entered€November€12,€1992,€andòò€inter€aliaóóÏordered€petitioner€to€pay€$40,000.00€alimonyò òòò€ó óin€solidoóó.€€The€decreeÏstates€that€the€parties€are€to€work€out€a€payment€schedule€for€paymentÏof€the€alimony€award.€€We€quote€from€the€decree:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà à14.€€The€Defendant,€Frank€L.€Day,€shall€payÏto€the€Plaintiff,€Robin€Moore€Day,€the€sum€ofÍForty€Thousand€Dollars€($40,000.00)€as€alimonyÏin€solido,€to€be€paid€in€installments€as€workedÏout€by€the€parties.€€If€a€payment€schedule€is€notÏworked€out€by€the€parties€by€January€1,€1993,Ïthis€matter€shall€be€brought€back€before€theÏcourt€to€set€payments.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€February€17,€1993,€Ms.€Day€filed€a€Petition€for€Enforcement€ofÏFinal€Decree€of€Divorce€and€For€Instructions.€€In€the€petition€Ms.€DayÏcomplained€of€ð ðMr.€Day€having€made€no€effort€€to€work€out€an€agreementÏto€begin€paying€the€$40,000.00€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€award€(which€was€toÏhave€been€in€place€by€January€1,€1993)€pursuant€to€the€Final€Decree€ofÏDivorce.ðð€€No€order€was€ever€entered€on€this€petition.Ìà àOn€March€16,€1993,€Ms.€Day€filed€a€Petition€for€Scire€Facias€inÏwhich€she€requested,€òòinter€aliaóó,€ð ð[t]hat€the€Respondent€[Frank€L.€Day]€beÏrequired€to€immediately€enter€into€a€payment€schedule€for€the€paymentÏof€the€Forty€Thousand€Dollar€($40,000.00)€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€award€thatÏwas€granted€to€the€Petitioner.ðð€€In€his€answer€to€the€petition,€Mr.€DayÏcontended€that€he€ð ð[was]€without€funds€and€.€.€.€€unable€to€pay€theÏalimony€.€.€.€.ðð€€The€trial€court€found€Mr.€Day€in€contempt€of€court€as€toÏother€provisions€of€the€petition€and€sentenced€him€to€five€days€in€theÏShelby€County€jail.€€On€November€15,€1993,€Ms.€Day€filed€anotherÍPetition€for€Scire€Facias€again€seeking€òòinter€aliaóó€payment€of€theÏ$40,000.00€alimony€award.€€Mr.€Day€filed€a€Response€to€Petition€forÏScire€€Facias€and€Counter„Petition€for€Scire€Facias€in€which€heÏresponded€that€€ð ðthe€Court€has€not€set€any€payment€schedule€for€theÏpayment€of€the€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€awarded€to€the€petitioner€in€the€FinalÏDecree€of€Divorce.€€Further,€respondent€anticipates€filing€a€Motion€toÏModify€Final€Decree€of€Divorce€regarding€the€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€in€theÏnear€future.ðð€€In€the€courtððs€Order€on€Petitions€for€Scire€Facias€enteredÏon€December€17,€1993,€the€court€ordered€Mr.€Day€to€pay€certain€childÏsupport€obligations€and€attorney€fees€awarded€pursuant€to€the€FinalÏDecree€of€Divorce.€€With€respect€to€the€alimony€òòin€solidoóó,€the€orderÏstates:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€above€arrangement€does€not€address€theÏalimony€in€solido€as€awarded€by€the€Court€at€theÏtrial€nor€dental€payments€that€are€disputed€byÏthe€Defendant.€€The€Defendant,€Frank€L.€Day,€shallÏwithin€thirty€(30)€days€of€entry€of€this€OrderÏmake€arrangements€to€begin€payments€of€thoseÏamounts€or€take€some€affirmative€action€to€haveÏthe€issues€addressed€by€the€Court.ÌÌà8 àà8 à*€*€*Ìà8 àà8 àIT€IS,€THEREFORE,€FURTHER€ORDERED€ADJUDGEDÏAND€DECREED,€òòby€consent€of€the€partiesóó:Ìà8 àà8 à*€*€*Ìà8 àà8 àThat€as€to€the€issues€of€the€alimony€in€solidoÏawarded€in€the€divorce€and€dental€paymentsÏwhich€are€disputed€by€the€Defendant,€Frank€L.ÏDay,€the€Defendant,€Frank€L.€Day,€shall€makeÏarrangements€within€thirty€(30)€days€to€beginÏpayment€of€these€amounts€or€take€someÏaffirmative€action€to€have€the€issues€addressedÏby€the€Court.€€(emphasis€in€original).Ìœ›ÌÓÓà àOn€January€19,€1994,€Mr.€Day€filed€a€Petition€for€Modification€ofÏFinal€Decree€of€Divorce€as€to€Alimony.€€In€the€petition,€Mr.€Day€sought€toÏhave€the€final€decree€modified€to€eliminate€the€€alimony€provision€orÏalternatively€to€stay€its€enforcement.€€In€the€petition,€Mr.€Day€alsoÏsought€relief€under€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€60.02.€€Ms.€Day€filed€a€response€to€theÏpetition€arguing,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€the€alimony€award€could€not€beÏmodified,€because€the€award€became€final€thirty€days€after€entry€of€theÏFinal€Decree€of€Divorce.€€Ms.€Day€contended€that€because€Mr.€Day€hadÏfailed€to€appeal€the€Final€Decree€of€Divorce,€and€because€the€award€wasÏof€alimony€òòin€solidoóó,€the€award€was€unmodifiable.Ìà àThe€chancellor€held€a€hearing€on€the€petition€for€modification€onÏApril€11,€1994,€and€by€order€entered€April€26,€1994,€denied€the€petitionÏfor€modification.€€The€transcript€of€the€proceedings€indicates€that€theÏchancellor€denied€relief€(1)€because€the€decree€was€a€final€award€ofÏalimony€òòin€solidoóó€and€not€modifiable,€and€(2)€because€the€petitionerððsÍRule€60.02€motion€in€the€petition,€which€was€filed€fourteen€monthsÏafter€entry€of€the€Final€Decree€of€Divorce,€was€untimely.€€The€courtÏrefused€to€allow€counsel€for€Mr.€Day€to€put€on€proof€regarding€Mr.€DayððsÏability€to€pay€the€alimony€award.€€Mr.€Day€filed€his€Notice€of€Appeal€onÏMay€10,€1994,€and€presents€three€issues€for€our€review.€€As€stated€inÏhis€brief,€those€issues€are:Ìà8 àà8 àÓÓ1.€€Whether€or€not€the€trial€court€erred€inÏawarding€the€appellee€alimony€in€solido€out€ofÏthe€future€earnings€of€the€appellant€when€theÏappellant€had€no€present€property€either€real€orÏpersonal,€from€which€to€satisfy€the€trial€court'sÏaward€of€alimony€in€solido.ÌÌà8 àà8 à2.€€Whether€or€not€the€court€erred€in€dismissingÏthe€appellant's€motion€to€modify€the€final€decreeÏof€divorce€as€untimely€filed.ÌÌà8 àà8 à3.€€Whether€or€not€the€court€erred€in€notÏallowing€the€appellant€to€present€his€offer€ofÏproof€to€make€a€record€for€this€honorable€courtÏto€review.ÌÓÓÌThe€appellee€also€presents€one€issue€for€our€review:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àWhether€Appellee€should€be€awarded€attorneyÏfees€and€suit€expenses€for€defending€thisÏappeal?ÓÓÌà àIn€petitionerððs€first€issue,€he€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÍawarding€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€because€he€did€not€have€present€means€toÏpay€the€award.€€Petitionerððs€assertion€must€fail€for€several€reasons.€ÏFirst,€he€raises€the€question€too€late.€€He€did€not€appeal€from€the€FinalÏDecree€of€Divorce€which€awarded€the€alimony,€and€therefore,€the€decreeÏbecame€final€thirty€days€after€its€entry.€Final€awards€of€alimonyòò€inÏsolidoóó€are€not€modifiable.€€ò òòòBrewer€v.€Brewer,ó óóó€869€S.W.2d€928€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1993).Ìà àPetitioner€also€argues€that€alimonyò ò€òòó óin€solidoóó€is€not€to€be€awardedÏout€of€future€earnings.€€However,€in€ò òòòAleshire€v.€Aleshireó óóó,€642€S.W.2dÏ729€(Tenn.€App.€1981),€this€Court,€addressing€that€issue,€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€€We€do€not€hold€that€in€no€event€may€alimonyò òòò€ó óinÏsolidoóó€be€awarded€from€future€earnings.€ÏExtreme€circumstances€could€arise€where€itÏmight€be€necessary€to€do€so.€€Illustrative€ofÏthose€circumstances,€but€not€all€inclusive,€is€aÏsituation€where€a€spouse€intentionally€disposedÏof€his€or€her€tangible€assets€in€order€to€depriveÏthe€other€spouse€of€alimonyòò€in€solidoóó€or€where€itÏcould€be€shown€that€a€spouse€entered€into€theÏmarriage€solely€to€have€his€or€her€spouse€workÏand€provide€him€or€her€with€an€education.€€ÌÌ642€S.W.2d€at€733.ÌÌÓÓà àIn€the€instant€case,€the€trial€court€found€that€Ms.€Day€should€beÏreimbursed€for€the€indebtedness€she€incurred€in€educating€herself€inÍorder€to€provide€for€her€own€support.€€The€trial€court€noted€that€hadÏthis€not€been€done,€she€would€have€been€entitled€to€rehabilitativeÏalimony€for€the€same€purpose.€€Extreme€circumstances€exist€in€thisÏcase€to€warrant€an€award€of€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€out€of€future€earnings.€€Ìà àPetitioner€also€asserts€that€his€petition€to€modify€the€divorceÏdecree€was€not€untimely,€because€the€decree€was€not€final€since€noÏpayment€schedule€was€ever€ordered.€€We€disagree.€€The€award€ofÏalimony€òòin€solidoóó€for€a€sum€certain€was€final,€and€the€only€thing€leftÏundone€was€the€method€of€payment.€€The€method€of€payment€chosen€byÏthe€parties€would€in€no€way€change€the€total€amount€awarded€when€theÏdecree€became€final.Ìà àThe€next€issue€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€theÏpetition€for€relief€from€the€final€decree€pursuant€to€the€provisions€ofÏTenn.R.Civ.P.€60.02.€€Rule€60.02€provides€in€pertinent€part:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àOn€motion€and€upon€such€terms€as€are€just,€theÏcourt€may€relieve€a€party€or€his€legalÏrepresentative€from€a€final€judgment,€order€orÏproceeding€for€the€following€reasons:ÌÌà àà àà àà à*à àà à*à àà à*ÌÌà8 àà8 à(5)€any€other€reason€justifying€relief€from€theÏoperation€of€the€judgment.€€The€motion€shall€beÏmade€within€a€reasonable€time,€and€for€reasonsÍ(1)€and€(2)€not€more€Ñ  ÑÑ   Ñthan€one€year€after€theÏjudgment,€order€or€proceeding€was€entered€orÏtaken.ÌÌÓÓà àA€motion€for€relief€under€Rule€60.02€addresses€itself€to€the€soundÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€judge,€and€the€scope€of€review€is€whether€theÏtrial€judge€abused€that€discretion.€€ò òòòUnderwood€v.€Zurich€Ins.€Co.ó óóó,Ï854€S.W.2d€94,€97€(Tenn.€1993).€€The€broad€power€granted€by€Rule€60.02Ï(5)€is€not€to€be€used€to€relieve€a€party€from€free,€calculated,€andÏdeliberate€choices€he€or€she€has€made.€€ò òòòBanks€v.€Dement€Constr.€Co.ó óóó,Ï817€S.W.2d€16,€19€(Tenn.€1991).€€Petitionerððs€claim€for€relief€based€onÏRule€60.02€(5)€must€fail€for€two€reasons.€€First,€it€was€filedÏapproximately€fourteen€months€after€the€decree€became€final€and€afterÏmany€proceedings€in€court€in€which€petitioner€could€have€raised€theÏsame€issue.€€It€simply€was€not€filed€within€a€reasonable€time.€€Second,Ïpetitioner€made€a€ð ðfree,€calculated,€and€deliberate€choiceðð€not€toÏappeal€from€the€final€decree€awarding€alimonyò òòò€ó óin€solidoóó.€€This€issue€isÏwithout€merit.Ìà àThe€third€issue€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€allowingÏpetitioner€to€make€an€offer€of€proof.€€Petitioner€asserts€that€heÍattempted€to€make€an€offer€of€proof€ð ðregarding€the€issues€presented€inÏits€[sic]€petition€to€modify€the€final€decree€of€divorce.ðð€€AnÏexamination€of€the€petition€indicates€that€the€proof€petitioner€soughtÏto€introduce€concerned€his€lack€of€discernable€assets€at€the€time€theÏdecree€was€entered€and€his€subsequent€financial€hardships.€€This€proofÏcould€have€no€bearing€on€this€case€in€view€of€the€courtððs€ruling€that€theÏpetition€was€without€merit€as€a€matter€of€law.€€The€petitioner€alsoÏcontends€that€he€should€have€been€allowed€to€offer€proof€on€the€issuesÏof€whether€the€final€decree€was€in€fact€a€final€judgment€and€whetherÏthe€court€properly€could€award€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€out€of€future€earnings.€ÏThese€matters€were€resolved€adversely€to€petitioner€as€a€matter€ofÏlaw,€and€any€offer€of€proof€would€have€had€no€bearing€on€the€issuesÏbefore€the€court.€€In€circumstances€in€which€it€is€obvious€from€theÏrecord€that€the€proffered€evidence€could,€under€no€circumstances,€Ñ  ÑbeÏrelevant€to€the€issues,€a€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€grant€an€offer€of€proofÏis€not€error.€€ò òòòAlley€v.€Stateó óóó,€882€S.W.2d€810€(Tenn.€œCrim.€App.›€1994).€ÏIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€proof€by€petitioner€of€the€factual€mattersÏpresented€in€his€petition€would€have€had€no€bearing€on€the€trial€courtððsÏdecision€which€was€made€as€a€matter€of€law€based€on€the€undisputedÍfacts.Ìà àRespondent€has€asked€this€Court€to€award€attorney€fees€incurredÏon€appeal,€and€the€Court€after€considering€the€record€as€a€whole€isÏinclined€to€allow€both€parties€to€pay€their€own€fees.€€Ìà àThe€order€of€the€trial€court€denying€the€petition€is€affirmed,€andÏthe€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€further€proceedings€asÏmay€be€necessary.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€assessed€against€theÏappellant.ÌÓÓœ›à àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÔ€%ÔÌò òCONCUR:ÌÌó óÔ€Ôœ_________________________________›Ìò òHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEó óÌÔ€%ÔÌÔ€Ôœ_________________________________›Ìò òHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.ÌœSENIOR›€JUDGEó óÌœ