ÿWPCÍ …# VU>a %Ÿ 0(¥4Íáðw@ø 0l8 0D¤ U:è 0J" 0Tl 0^À 0h 0r† 0|ø 0†t 0ú 1uŠ U,ÿ 0d+U,B)»DCä AM'U*t Bž"» D3݇v~— 0@vÓU AO(Æw 0D= D/ B°˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 <èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX($¡¡nnG x°°3|xÖ ÄÅDÆÇDÈDÉDÊËIÌÓ€Ö((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT2 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% Line 7 d$$$$7Border 1dd€-%Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌMarch€6,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó(((('ÿÿdxd }Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔCourt€of€Appeals€Rule€10(b):Ìà8 àThe€Court,€with€the€concurrence€of€all€judges€participating€in€theÏcase,€may€affirm,€reverse€or€modify€the€actions€of€the€trial€courtÏby€memorandum€opinion€when€a€formal€opinion€would€have€noÏprecedential€value.€€When€a€case€is€decided€by€memorandum€opinionÏit€shall€be€designated€"MEMORANDUM€OPINION,"€shall€not€beÏpublished,€and€shall€not€be€cited€or€relied€on€for€any€reason€in€aÏsubsequent€unrelated€case.€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€##X„d&ÓÑ#€##Xd#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÓ ` Ü‚Xœ ’X ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€®:XdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  Ñ›BRENDA€L.€GRAY,à à)Ìà àà à)ÌÓ#` Ü‚Xœôx‘X#Óà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà à)à à01„A„01„9508„CV„00359Ìv.à àà à)Ìà àà à)à àSumner€CircuitÌÙ€€ÙœßL€&)%;+'h|$©` ç `€€Lß›STEPHEN€D.€GRAY,à à)à àNo.€12431„CÌà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à à)ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€¼ÔCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€SUMNER€COUNTYÌÌAT€GALLATIN,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€GOODALL,€JUDGEÌÓ ` Ü‚XœÈ“X ÓÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌÔ€XÔJOE€P.€BINKLEY,€SR.ÌFirst€American€CenterÌ315€Deaderick€Street€Suite€2395ÌNashville,€Tennessee€37238ÌÌJOHN€BELL€WHITESELLÌ150€Second€Avenue€North,€Suite€300ÌNashville,€Tennessee€37201Ìà àATTORNEYS€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLEEÌÌÌÌCAROL€L.€SOLOMANÌ214€Second€Avenue€NorthÌ400€Washington€SquareÌNashville,€Tennessee€37201ÌÌTHOMAS€F.€BLOOMÌ500€Church€StreetÌFifth€FloorÌNashville,€Tennessee€37219Ìà àATTORNEYS€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLANTÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓœAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€¼ÔSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÓ  ÓÓÓòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóó× ƒ+ ××  ×ÌÓ  ÓÓ#` Ü` ä œÈ“X#ÓÔ€XÔà àFollowing€a€marriage€of€approximately€eight€years,€WifeÏfiled€a€complaint€for€absolute€divorce€in€November€1993.€€In€herÏcomplaint,€she€alleged€adultery,€inappropriate€marital€conduct,Ïand€irreconcilable€differences.€€Husband€answered€and€filed€aÏcounter„complaint€which€alleged€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment,Ïinappropriate€marital€conduct,€and€irreconcilable€differences.ÌÌà àAfter€the€pre„trial€conference€in€October€1994,€the€trialÏcourt€declared€the€parties€divorced€pursuant€to€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€section€36„4„120€and€held€that€either€party€couldÏpresent€evidence€of€fault€where€relevant€at€the€final€hearing.€€OnÏ13€March€1995,€the€trial€court€held€the€final€hearing€and€heardÍthe€partiesðð€arguments.ÌÌà àIn€its€decree€of€23€March€1995,€the€trial€court€divided€theÏdisputed€items€of€separate€and€marital€property.€€The€trial€courtÏawarded€Wife€a€Corvette€automobile,€a€1992€Cadillac€automobile,Ïand€a€Clayton„Marcus€sofa.€€In€addition,€the€court€ordered€Wife€toÏassume€responsibility€for€keeping€proper€insurance€coverage€on€theÏautomobiles,€to€assume€all€indebtedness€on€the€automobiles,€and€toÏhold€Husband€harmless€from€any€future€payments€on€the€automobiles.€ÏThe€trial€court€equally€divided€the€net€proceeds€of€$60,804.00Ïfrom€the€sale€of€the€partiesðð€marital€home.€€The€trial€courtÏordered€Husband€to€be€responsible€for€and€hold€Wife€harmless€fromÏall€debts€incurred€by€Husband.€€As€to€any€remaining€items€ofÏmarital€property,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€parties€to€submitÏtheir€proposed€division€for€its€consideration.ÌÌà àIn€a€supplemental€order€entered€on€28€March€1995,€the€courtÏdivided€the€remaining€marital€property.€€The€court€also€awardedÏWife€$10,755.00€for€attorneyððs€fees€and€$10,000.00€alimony€inÏsolido€as€further€distributions€of€the€marital€property.ÌÌà àHusband€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€as€to€that€portion€of€theÏdecree€distributing€the€marital€property.Ìà àÌà àThe€partiesðð€marriage€lasted€for€approximately€eight€years.€ÏAt€the€time€of€the€divorce€hearing,€Wife€was€44€years€old€andÍHusband€was€37€years€old.€€There€were€no€children€born€as€a€resultÏof€the€marriage.ÌÌà àAt€the€time€of€the€partiesðð€marriage€in€1986,€Wife€workedÏat€Cummings€Sign€Company.€€She€worked€there€until€she€was€ð ðlaidÏoffðð€on€30€September€1990.€€After€losing€her€job,€she€was€unableÏto€find€suitable€work€in€the€job€market.€€For€the€next€threeÏyears,€she€helped€Husband€in€every€aspect€of€his€mobile€homeÏhauling€business.€€Her€responsibilities€included€escorting€mobileÏhomes,€keeping€the€company€books,€and€balancing€the€checkbooks.€ÏShe€also€mowed€grass,€picked€up€parts,€and€did€anything€else€thatÏneeded€to€be€done.€€At€trial,€Husband€admitted€that€Wifeððs€work,Ïwhich€was€mostly€uncompensated,€saved€money€for€the€company.€€InÏaddition€to€working€in€the€business,€Wife€also€maintained€the€homeÏand€did€everything€necessary€to€keep€the€house€going€and€HusbandÏcomfortable.ÌÌà àDuring€the€partiesðð€marriage,€Husband€acquired€vehicles,Ïequipment,€and€assets€used€in€the€business.€€He€also€acquired€raceÏcars€and€related€racing€tools€and€equipment.€€Wife›€valued€all€theÏvehicles,€equipment,€œand€other›€assets€used€in€the€œbusiness€as€wellÏas€the›€race€œcars›€and€related€racing€tools€and€equipment€acquiredÏand€accumulated€during€the€marriage€at€œ$143,000.00.€€Wife€askedÏthe€court€to€award€her€the€1972€Corvette€automobile€which€sheÏtestified€Husband€had€given€her€as€a€gift€during€the€marriage.€ÏThe€parties€agreed€that€the€Corvetteððs€value€was€approximatelyÍ$7,500.00.ÌÌà àShortly€after€their€marriage,€the€parties€purchased€a€homeÏfor€$160,000.00.€€Wife€initially€paid€$26,000.00€from€the€sale€ofÏher€pre„marriage€home€as€a€down€payment€for€the€marital€home.€ÏHusbandððs€testimony€was€that€he€initially€paid€$7,000.00€orÏ$8,000.00€down€on€the€marital€home€and€that€he€later€addedÏimprovements.€€Even€though€Wifeððs€initial€investment€of€pre„marital€assets€into€the€marital€home€was€approximately€three€timesÏthat€of€Husbandððs,€€Wife€agreed€to€split€the€net€proceeds€from€theÏsale€›of€the€marital€œhome€equally›€with€œHusband.›€€œÌÌà àThe€parties€had€only€one€joint€debt€which€was€on€theÏCadillac€automobile.€€Husband,€however,€argued€that€both€of€theÏparties€were€responsible€for€a€VISA€credit€card€debt€of€someÏ$4,000.00.€€He€admitted€that€the€VISA€account€was€solely€in€hisÏname€and€that€the€Wife€had€never€used€the€VISA€card.€ÏNevertheless,€he€asked€the€court€to€split€the€indebtedness€betweenÏthe€parties€because€he€claimed€to€have€used€the€card€to€pay€offÏð ðhousehold€stuffðð€and€to€make€a€house€payment€on€one€occasion.€ÏHusband€was€unable€to€substantiate€these€claims.ÌÌà àIt€was€Wifeððs€testimony€that€the€VISA€card€debt€belongedÏsolely€to€Husband.€€She€explained€that€Husband€had€used€his€creditÏcard€exclusively€to€make€purchases€for€himself.€€She€alsoÏtestified€regarding€his€purchase€of€a€race€motor€using€a€$4,000.00Ícredit€card€cash€advance.€€The€trial€court€held€that€Husband€wasÏresponsible€for€and€would€pay€the€VISA€credit€card€debt.ÌÌà àDuring€the€marriage,€the€parties€owned€two€certificates€ofÏdeposit€each€with€a€value€of€$10,000.00,€not€including€the€amountÏof€interest€accrued€during€the€marriage.€€Husband€cashed€theÏcertificates€in€March€1994€even€though€they€were€the€jointÏproperty€of€the€parties.€€Wife€never€ascertained€what€Husband€didÏwith€the€proceeds€of€the€certificates€of€deposit;€however,€at€theÏhearing,€it€was€shown€that€Husband€had€paid€$20,500.00€as€a€downÏpayment€toward€the€purchase€of€a€house€in€January€1995.ÌÌà àHusbandððs€own€proof€of€his€income€contradicted€hisÏtestimony€regarding€the€source€of€the€down€payment.€€He€testifiedÏthat€he€received€the€$20,500.00,€which€he€used€for€the€downÏpayment€on€the€house,€from€Luv€Homes€for€contract€labor€he€hadÏperformed.€€In€that€same€hearing,€however,€he€testified€that€heÏwas€destitute€and€introduced€an€income€and€expense€statement€toÏshow€that€he€had€an€income€of€only€$25,000.00€before€taxes€inÏ1994.€€The€irony€of€this€testimony€lies€in€the€fact€that€less€thanÏone€month€after€Husbandððs€destitute€year€ended,€he€came€up€with€aÏdown€payment€of€$20,500.00,€80%€of€his€1994€before€tax€income,Ïwith€which€to€purchase€a€new€house.ÌÌà àHusbandððs€explanation€for€how€he€spent€the€$20,000.00€inÏproceeds€from€the€certificates€of€deposit€was€also€suspect.€€HeÍtestified€that€he€spent€the€money€on€household€bills,€companyÏexpenses,€and€to€catch€up€on€house€payments€ð ðat€the€end.ðð€€TheÏproof€showed,€however,€that€Husbandððs€explanation€was€clearlyÏerroneous.€€The€marital€home€was€sold€in€February€1993.€€At€theÏclosing,€three€months€of€back€payments€on€the€house€note€and€backÏtaxes€were€deducted€from€›the€sale€œproceeds.›€€œMoreover,€Husband€didÏnot€cash€the›€certificates€of€deposit€œuntil›€more€than€a€year€afterÏthe€sale€of€the€marital€œhome.ÌÌà àHusbandððs›€issue€is€whether€the€trial€court€properly€awardedÏalimony€in€solido€and€attorneyððs€fees€to€œWife›€as€œfurther›Ïœdistributions›€of€œthe€marital€property.›ÌÌà àœWe›€review€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€de€novo€upon€theÏrecord€with€a€presumption€of€œcorrectness›€œas€to›€the€trial€œjudgeððs›Ïfindings€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€13(d).ÌÌà àIn€this€case,€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€againstÏthe€trial€courtððs€œfindings.€€We€are€of€the€opinion,€afterÏreviewing€€this€record,€that€the€preponderance€of€the€evidenceÏfully€supports€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àTherefore,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€andÏremand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€any€further€necessaryÏproceedings.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant,€StephenÍD.€Gray.ÌÌÓÓà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGE›