ÿWPC …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ 0^æ 0hD 0r¬ 0| 0†š 0 1u° 0d% U>‰ B)Ç DCð AM3 B€U*âÇv~©vÓ' D3ú 0@- AOmƼ 0D‚ D/Æ Bõ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ FGHDIUJVKELMÓ€WXDÒ ÿÿÿÿÿÏÿ3|x\2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d< Œ 9p`(Arial ØÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌOctober€11,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPt HHð@ÿìÿîRd(ühh° @d'ÿœÿ¦ šStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€VbXXdìdÈ7Ñò òÓ  Ó›à@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌà@ àò òWESTERN€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌóóÌÌGEORGIA€NORMAN€FUQUA,€€€à àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àó óPlaintiff/Appellee,ò òà àà àà à)à àó óRobertson€County€Domestic€œNo.€8690›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌEDWARD€DENTON€FUQUA,€€€€€€€€€€€à à)à àó óAppeal€No.€œ01A01„9510„DR„00464ò òÌ€€à àà àà àà àà àà à)›Ìó óà àœDefendant/Appellant.à à›à àò òà à)à àÌó óòòÌóóò òÌ€€€ÌÌÌà@ àó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€ROBERTSON€COUNTY€DOMESTIC€RELATIONS€COURTÌÙ€€ÙœßL€$'#;+'h|œá` ç `€€Lß›à@ àAT€SPRINGFIELD,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€BURTON€D.€GLOVER,ÏJUDGE€ÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:òòà àà àà àFor€the€œDefendant/Appellantóó:òò›ÌóóÌPhilip€E.€Smith€€à àà àà àà àJohn€B.€Link,€IIIÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌò òÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÇØØÙ  ÙÓÓÑ7€-¤XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌà àIn€this€divorce€case,€Defendant„Appellant,€Edward€Denton€Fuqua€(Husband),€has€appealedÏthe€trial€court's€order€requiring€him€to€pay€periodic€alimony€to€Plaintiff„Appellee,€Georgia€NormanÏFuqua€œ(Wife),›€in€the€amount€of€$725€per€month€for€ten€years,€$600€per€month€for€the€next€tenÏœyears,›€and€$300€per€month€for€the€following€five€years,€to€terminate€upon€death€or€Wife'sÏremarriage.€€Husband€also€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€equitable€division€of€the€marital€estate.€€WeÏaffirm€the€decision€of€the€trial€court,€with€the€duration€of€the€alimony€œmodified€as›€set€forth€below.€€€€€Ìà àHusband€and€Wife€were€married€in€1967.€Both€Husband€and€Wife€worked€prior€to€theÏbirth€of€the€partiesðð€first€child€in€1972.€€From€1972€to€1988,€Husband€continued€his€work,€whileÏWife€œraised€the€partiesðð€two€children€and€worked›€in€various€part„time€jobs.€€In€1988,€Wife€beganÏworking€œfull„time›€for€the€Military€Department€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ìà àOver€the€course€of€their€twenty„eight€year€marriage,€the€partiesðð€relationship€becameÏstrained.€€Both€parties€admit€several€extramarital€affairs.€€œWifeððs›€indiscretions€were€limited€to€aÏone„year€period€in€which€she€and€Husband€participated€in€a€ð ðswingersðð€club.€€Wife€maintains€thatÏher€outside€relationships€were€sanctioned€by€Husband€because€he€wanted€to€participate€in€clubÏactivities.€€Husband€admits€that€he€engaged€in€extramarital€affairs€throughout€the€partiesðð€œmarriage›Ïand€that€several€of€these€were€without€Wifeððs€knowledge€or€consent.€€€€Ìà àWife€first€sued€Husband€for€divorce€in€1993.€€The€trial€court€granted€Wife€a€divorce,Ïdistributed€the€marital€œestate,›€and€awarded€alimony€and€child€support.€€In€òòò òFuqua€v.€Fuquaó óóó,€œNo.Ï01A01„9403„DR„00143,€1994›€WL€441041€(Tenn.€App.€œAug.€17,€1994),›€this€Court€reversed€theÏdecision€of€the€trial€court€because€Wife€had€failed€to€include€a€statutory€oath€in€her€divorceÏcomplaint.€€Ìà àWife€refiled€for€divorce€in€1994.€At€the€time€of€the€second€trial,€Husband€was€forty„sevenÏyears€old€and€earned€a€net€monthly€income€of€$1999.28.€€Wife€was€forty„six€years€old€and€earnedÏa€net€monthly€income€of€$877.70.Ìà àAfter€hearing€the€partiesðð€testimony,€the€trial€court€granted€a€divorce€to€Wife€on€the€groundÏof€inappropriate€marital€conduct€and€ordered€Husband€to€pay€periodic€alimony€òòò òin€futuroó ó€óóto€WifeÍof€$725€per€month€for€ten€years,€$600€per€month€for€the€second€ten€œyears,›€and€$300€per€month€forÏthe€following€five€years,€to€terminate€upon€death€or€Wife's€remarriage.€€In€œdeciding€to€award›Ïperiodic€alimony,€the€trial€œcourt€found›€that€Husband€œhas›€ð ða€greater€chance€of€making€more€incomeÏin€the€œfutureðð;€›€that€Wife€has€a€ð ðvery€limited€income€earning€œcapacityðð;€›€and€that€ð ðWife€should€notÏbe€left€in€a€worse€financial€situation€because€of€the€inappropriate€marital€conduct€of€the€Husband.ðð€€ÏIn€addition,€the€trial€court€distributed€the€marital€estate.€€Ìà àHusband€appeals€the€decision€of€the€trial€court,€alleging€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€notÏawarding€rehabilitative€alimony€instead€of€periodic€alimony,€that€the€periodic€alimony€awarded€wasÏexcessive€and€for€too€long€a€œduration,›€and€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€the€award€of€certain€items€ofÏpersonal€property.€€Wife€seeks€her€attorneyððs€fees€and€costs€on€appeal.€Ìà àWe€must€presume€the€trial€court's€œfindings€of€fact€are€correct›€unless€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€it.€€œRule€13(d)€of€Tenn.€Rules€of€App.€Proc.›€€In€determining€whether€theÏtrial€judge's€award€of€alimony€is€correct,€we€first€analyze€the€facts€of€this€case€under€the€controllingÏstatute,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101,€and€applicable€case€law.€€Under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101,€there€is€a€preference€for€rehabilitative€alimony.€œTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)€(1991€&ÏSupp.€1995).€€However,›€where€rehabilitation€is€not€feasible,€a€court€may€grant€alimony€òòò òinÏfuturoó óóó,€also€termed€periodic€œalimony.€€òòò òId.ó óóó;€òòò ò€Self›€v.€Selfó óóó,€861€S.W.2d€360,€361€(Tenn.€1993).€Ïœà àÌà àFrom›€the€record€in€this€case,€the€evidence€preponderates€in€support€of€the€trial€courtððsÏdecision€to€award€periodic€alimony€to€Wife€in€lieu€of€rehabilitative€alimony.€€Wife€is€forty„six€yearsÏold€and€œhas›€neither€a€college€degree€nor€substantive€work€experience.€€Wifeððs€contribution€inÏraising€the€partiesðð€two€children€allowed€Husband€to€achieve€a€higher€income€level.€€While€Wife€isÏcurrently€employed,€it€is€doubtful€that€she€will€œever€have›€Husband's€earning€capacity,€and€it€isÏevident€that€she€will€never€enjoy€a€standard€of€living€comparable€to€that€which€the€parties€enjoyedÏduring€the€marriage.€€As€such,€Wife€is€at€a€great€"economic€disadvantage"€relative€to€œHusband,€and›Ïrehabilitation€is€not€feasible€in€"consideration€of€all€relevant€factors."€€€òòò òFranklin€v.€Franklinó óóó,Í746€S.W.2d€œ715,€718›€(Tenn.€App.€œ1987).€›€Therefore,€œthe€trial›€courtððs€award€of€periodic€alimonyÏinstead€of€rehabilitative€alimony€is€affirmed.€€€Ìà àHusband€also€seeks€review€of€the€amount€and€duration€of€the€periodic€alimony€awarded.€Ïœ"The›€amount€of€alimony€to€be€allowed€in€any€case€is€a€matter€for€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€inÏview€of€the€particular€œcircumstances."›€€œòòò òIngram›€v.€Ingramó óóó,€721€S.W.2d€262,€264€(Tenn.€App.Ïœ1986).›€€œAlthough›€there€is€no€formula€for€determining€the€amount€of€alimony,€œð ðthe›€real€need€of€theÏspouse€seeking€the€support€is€the€single€most€important€œfactor.ð𛀀œòòò òCranford›€v.€Cranfordó óóó,€772ÏS.W.2d€48,€50€(Tenn.€App.€1989).€€€In€addition,€œcourts€consider€the›€ability€of€the€obligor€spouseÏto€provide€œsupport.›€€œòòò òAaron€v.€Aaronó óóó,€909€S.W.2d€408,€410€(Tenn.€1995).€€òòò ò›€ó óóóThe€amount€ofÏalimony€should€be€determined€œso€ð ðthat›€the€party€obtaining€the€divorce€[is€not]€left€in€a€worseÏfinancial€situation€than€he€or€she€had€before€the€opposite€party's€misconduct€brought€about€theÏœdivorce.ð𛀀òòò òShackleford€v.€Shacklefordó óóó,€611€S.W.2d€598,€601€(Tenn.€App.€œ1980).›€€œAlthough›Ïalimony€is€not€to€provide€a€former€spouse€with€financial€ease,€it€should€be€awarded€in€œsuch€a›€wayÏthat€the€former€spouses€are€in€equitable€positions.€€œò òòòAaronó óóó,€909€S.W.2d›€at€411.€€In€the€instantÏcase,€Wifeððs€statement€of€income€and€expenses€reflected€a€monthly€net€income€of€$877€and€aÏmonthly€shortfall€of€more€than€$1,400.€€Husbandððs€statement€shows€a€monthly€net€income€ofÏ$1,999€and€a€monthly€shortfall€of€$26.22.€€A€significant€portion€of€Husbandððs€monthly€expensesÏare€accountable€to€discretionary€automobile€costs€taken€on€by€Husband€after€Wifeððs€firstÏapplication€for€divorce.€€Given€the€relative€financial€positions€of€both€parties,€the€record€supportsÏthe€amount€of€periodic€alimony€awarded€by€the€trial€court.€€However,€given€the€age€of€both€parties,Ïthe€duration€of€the€periodic€alimony€appears€excessive.€€Consequently,€the€award€of€periodicÏalimony€is€modified€as€follows:€Husband€is€required€to€pay€$725€per€month€for€ten€years,€$600Ïper€month€for€the€next€five€years,€and€$300€per€month€for€the€following€five€œyears›œ€to€terminateÏupon€death€or€Wifeððs€remarriage.›Ìòòò òà àóóó óHusband€alleges€further€that€the€trial€court€inequitably€divided€the€parties'€marital€estate€andÏasks€that€he€be€granted€more€pieces€of€antique€furniture€from€the€parties'€marital€residence.€€€A€trialÍcourt€has€wide€discretion€in€the€division€of€marital€property.€€òòò òHarrington€v.€Harringtonóó,€ó ó798ÏS.W.2d€244,€245€(Tenn.€App.€1990)ò ò;€òòMarmino€v.€Marminoó óóó,€238€S.W.2d€105,€107€(Tenn.ÏApp.€œ1950).›€€The€trial€court's€decision€is€given€great€œweight,€òòò òKelly€v.€Kellyó óóó,€679€S.W.2d€458,Ï460€(Tenn.€App.€1984),›€and€will€œbe›€reversed€œonly€upon›€a€finding€of€abuse€of€œdiscretion.€Ïòòò òMarminoó óóó,€238€S.W.2d€at€107.€€We›€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€on€this€œissue,›€and€the€decision€ofÏthe€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€€€€€Ìà àWife€has€requested€her€attorney's€fees€for€this€appeal.€€Considering€the€entire€record€andÏthe€situation€of€the€parties,€the€parties€should€each€bear€the€expense€of€their€own€attorney's€fees€forÏthis€œappeal.€€ÌÇ›à àAffirmed€as€modified.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€against€the€Appellant,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓÓœÌÌ›à àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòœÌ›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌòòœÌ›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J