ÿWPC¨  …# VUNa %¯ 0GµUDü4@ T 1mc 0‹Ð 0D[ 0dŸ w@ C 0JK 0T• 0^é 0hG 0r¯ 0|! 0† 0# 1u³U,( 0dTU,¸ BäU>B)?DCh AM«U*ø D3"Uv~t 0@òvÓ2 0 0Š” 0  0´¾ 0Çr 0Û9 0ï AOÆR 0D D/\ B‹ ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(½Ì$¡¡Ô€X¦\XXXÔ8ëu $ZŠ,Century-WP Regular;p‚ RSTUVW3|x"  tuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;(3¸d$¤¤Ý ƒ½Ì!ÝÔ€XÖqXXXÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à   D  D    U D Ó€" 2 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 d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial$$$$'ÿÿdxd Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òMay€9,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€##X„d&ÓÑ#€##Xd#ÑÔ€%ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ £ ÒÑ7€ÖqXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ÔÓ  Ó›IN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌÓ  Ó_____________________________________________________________________________ÌÌCHARLES€STEVEN€DENBOW,à àà àChester€Chancery€No.€8617Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àC.A.€No.€02A01„9410„CH„00238Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHon.€Joe€C.€Morris,€JudgeÌÙ€€ÙœßL€(+';+'h|` Å `€€Lß›Ìv.ÌÌSANDRA€KAY€DENBOW,ÌÌà àDefendant/Appellant.ÌÌœÌMICHAEL€L.€WEINMAN,€Tatum€&€Tatum,€Henderson,€ÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellant.Ì›ÌMIKE€MOSIER,€Jackson,€Attorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee.ÌÌòòò òœREVERSED›€AND€REMANDEDó óóóÌÌOpinion€Filed:Ì_____________________________________________________________________________ÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ó óÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àThis€is€a€domestic€relations€case€with€an€unusual€twist.€€On€May€3,Ï1994,€plaintiff€filed€a€complaint€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Chester€CountyÏseeking€a€divorce€from€defendant€on€the€grounds€of€irreconcilableÏdifferences.€€At€the€same€time,€plaintiff€filed€a€marital€dissolutionÍagreement€(ð ðagreementðð)€executed€by€the€parties€on€May€2,€1994.€€TheÏagreement€provided€that€the€parties€would€have€joint€custody€of€theirÏtwo€minor€children,€then€ages€13€and€15,€with€the€children€residing€withÏplaintiff.€€No€child€support€was€to€be€paid€by€either€party.€€In€addition,€theÏagreement€did€not€make€any€allowances€for€alimony€and€purported€toÏdivide€the€real€and€personal€property€between€the€parties.€€Plaintiff€wasÏrepresented€by€counsel€at€the€time€the€parties€executed€the€agreement,Ïbut€defendant€was€not.€€Shortly€thereafter,€defendant€employed€counselÏand€on€June€3,€1994,€filed€a€motion€to€set€aside€the€agreement.€€In€herÏmotion€defendant€contended€that€she€was€forced€to€sign€the€agreementÏunder€duress€and€fear€of€bodily€harm.€€She€also€contended€that€theÏagreement€did€not€adequately€provide€for€the€care€and€maintenance€of€theÏpartiesðð€minor€children€or€make€an€equitable€settlement€of€the€partiesððÏproperty€as€required€by€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„103(b)€(1991).€€Defendantððs€motionÏasked€the€court€to€set€the€agreement€aside€and€allow€the€parties€toÏproceed€with€the€divorce€as€if€the€agreement€had€never€been€executed.ÌÌà àOn€August€17,€1994,€the€chancellor€held€a€hearing€on€the€motion€toÏset€aside€œthe›€œagreement.›€€The€parties€were€the€only€witnesses€to€testify.€ÏOn€August€31,€1994,€the€trial€court€entered€a€final€decree€of€divorceÍwherein€the€court€ratified€and€approved€the€agreement€and€awarded€theÏparties€an€absolute€divorce.€€This€appeal€followed.€€Defendant€hasÏpresented€two€issues€for€our€consideration:ÌÌÓÓà8 à(1)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€set€aside€theÏMarital€Dissolution€Agreement€because€Mrs.€Denbow€wasÏacting€under€duress,€coercion,€and€undue€influence€when€sheÏsigned€the€agreement;€andÌÌà8 à(2)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€entering€a€final€decree€ofÏdivorce€in€this€matter€on€the€grounds€of€the€irreconcilableÏdifferences€since€the€marital€dissolution€agreement€executedÏby€the€parties€did€not€adequately€provide€for€the€custody€andÏmaintenance€of€the€children€or€provide€for€an€equitableÏsettlement€of€the€property€rights€between€the€parties€asÏrequired€by€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„103(b).ÌÌÓÓà àÌà àNotwithstanding€the€above,€it€appears€to€this€court€that€the€realÏissue€presented€by€this€appeal€is€whether€the€chancellor€was€in€aÏposition€to€enter€a€valid€consent€judgment€when€it€readily€appearedÏbefore€the€court€that€there€was€no€agreement€between€the€parties€at€theÏtime€the€judgment€was€entered.€€In€our€opinion,€this€was€error€on€the€partÏof€the€chancellor.ÌÌà àIt€is€undisputed€from€this€record€that€although€defendant€signed€theÍagreement€on€May€2,€1994,€she€expressed€her€repudiation€of€theÏagreement€32€days€later€by€filing€a€motion€to€set€aside€the€agreement€andÏtry€the€case€as€a€contested€divorce.€€Her€repudiation€was€further€madeÏclear€to€the€court€by€virtue€of€her€testimony€in€open€court€on€August€17,Ï1994.ÌÌà àThis€court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€resolution€of€this€issue€isÏgoverned€by€the€principles€set€forth€by€our€supreme€court€in€the€case€ofÏòòHarbour€v.€Brown€for€Ulrichóó,€732€S.W.2d€598€(Tenn.€1987).€€òòHarboróóÏinvolved€a€suit€and€a€countersuit€wherein€plaintiff€sought€specificÏperformance€of€an€alleged€real€estate€contract€along€with€an€injunctionÏagainst€a€threatened€foreclosure€action€under€an€existing€deed€of€trust.€ÏOn€the€date€the€case€was€set€for€trial€the€parties€announced€to€the€courtÏthat€they€had€reached€an€agreement€and€would€submit€an€order€ofÏcompromise€and€dismissal.€€The€terms€of€the€compromise€were€notÏannounced€to€the€court.€€Before€entry€of€an€order€in€the€case,€it€wasÏbrought€to€the€courtððs€attention€that€defendant€had€withdrawn€hisÏconsent€to€the€compromise.€€The€court€nonetheless€entered€an€Order€ofÏCompromise€and€Dismissal.€€Defendant€moved€to€vacate€the€order€and€toÏreschedule€the€case€for€trial€on€the€merits,€but€the€trial€court€overruledÍthe€motion€and€once€again€dismissed€the€case€with€prejudice.€€òòId.óó€Ìà àÌà àIn€reversing€the€trial€court,€the€òòHarbouróó€court€set€forth€itsÏrationale€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€resolution€of€disputes€by€agreement€of€the€partiesÏis€to€be€encouraged.€€But€a€valid€consent€judgment€can€not€beÏentered€by€a€court€when€one€party€withdraws€his€consent€andÏthis€fact€is€communicated€to€the€court€prior€to€entry€of€theÏjudgment.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€general€rule€defining€the€power€of€a€court€to€enter€aÏconsent€judgment€is€set€forth€in€49€C.J.S.€Judgments€ðð€174(b),Ïas€follows:Ìà àà8 àÌà8 àà8 àThe€power€of€the€court€to€render€a€judgment€byÏconsent€is€dependent€on€the€existence€of€theÏconsent€of€the€parties€at€the€time€the€agreementÏreceives€the€sanction€of€the€court€or€is€renderedÏand€promulgated€as€a€judgment.ÌÌÓÓÌòòId.óó€(citations€omitted).€€The€court€further€stated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àA€valid€consent€judgment€cannot€be€rendered€by€a€courtÏwhen€the€consent€of€one€of€the€parties€thereto€is€wanting.€€ItÏis€not€sufficient€to€support€the€judgment€that€a€partyððsÏconsent€thereto€may€at€one€time€have€been€given;€consentÏmust€exist€at€the€very€moment€the€court€undertakes€to€makeÏthe€agreement€the€judgment€of€the€court.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€600€(citing€òòBurnaman€v.€Heatonóó,€240€S.W.2d€288,€291€(Tex.€1951)).à àÌÌà àIn€òòElrod€v.€Elrodóó,€No.€03A01„9108„GS„260,€1991€WL€238233€(Tenn.ÏApp.€Nov.€18,€1991),€the€eastern€section€of€this€court€applied€theÏprinciples€announced€in€òòHarbouróó€œto›€a€domestic€relations€case.€€In€òòElrodóó,Ïthe€parties€negotiated€a€settlement€of€all€issues€prior€to€trial€which€theyÏorally€announced€to€the€court.€€At€that€time€the€parties€had€not€reducedÏtheir€agreement€to€writing€in€the€form€of€a€marital€dissolutionÏagreement.€€No€further€proceedings€were€held€until€a€final€judgment€wasÏpresented€to€the€court€for€approval.€€The€trial€court€entered€a€finalÏjudgment€of€divorce€over€plaintiffððs€objections€and€without€a€signedÏmarital€dissolution€agreement.€€In€òòElrodóó,€as€in€this€case,€there€is€noÏquestion€but€that€the€trial€judge€knew€before€he€entered€the€final€decreeÏof€divorce€that€a€party€had€repudiated€the€agreement.€€The€òòElrodóó€courtÏfound€that€the€trial€judge€was€without€authority€to€enter€a€final€decree.€ÏòòId.óó€at€*1.€€We€are€of€the€same€opinion€in€this€case.ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€granting€the€parties€aÏdivorce€on€the€grounds€of€irreconcilable€differences€œand€approving€theÍagreement€is›€œreversed.€›€œThis›€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court.€€InÏconnection€with€the€remand,€we€are€constrained€to€note€the€contents€ofÏdefendantððs€motion€to€consider€post€judgment€facts,€which€plaintiff€didÏnot€oppose.€€The€partiesðð€son,€Wesley€Denbow,€submitted€an€affidavitÏstating€that€œdefendant›€and€he€were€attacked€by€plaintiff€and€hisÏgirlfriend€on€Thanksgiving€Day€1994€when€they€went€to€plaintiffððs€houseÏto€retrieve€some€of€Wesleyððs€personal€belongings.€€Prior€to€that€incident,ÏWesley€had€moved€in€with€his€mother€and€contemplated€living€with€herÏafter€his€œparentsðð›€divorce€became€final.€€Wesley€Denbow€also€stated€thatÏhis€brother€was€also€living€with€his€mother€at€that€time.ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€herein€stated,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€œasÏto›€all€matters€reversed.€€This€cause€is€remanded€to€the€chancery€court€ofÏChester€County€for€a€hearing€and€determination€on€the€merits.€€TheÏagreement€stands€repudiated€by€this€record.€€Pursuant€to€provisions€ofÏT.R.A.P.€42,€this€case€is€to€be€remanded€to€the€trial€court€as€soon€asÏreasonably€possible€for€such€further€and€other€proceedings€that€may€beÏdesirable€and€necessary,€not€inconsistent€with€the€provisions€of€thisÏopinion.€€Costs€in€this€cause€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€œplaintiff,›€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€Ì€ÌÓÓÏà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCRAWFORD,€P.J.Ìà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àLILLARD,€J.