WPC $# UN %a 0(g 0l 0D Nw@N4 0J  0T 0^F 0h 0r  0|~ 0 0 1u 0d BU> U*D n v~; v HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,0nL9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($3|x/((2$ !      0  (%$  1   &D'D(U)D*+,D-.D/S"vw2 0Indent123  H2" 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 d<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial !  $       Thisstatutehadbeenineffectaboutthreemonthsbeforethecaseatbarwasheard.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! .         \RA'\   \RA'\ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEEASTERNSECTIONATKNOXVILLE  LORILEEGRISSOM(BROWN),  ) KNOXCIRCUIT      ) Plaintiff/Appellee   ) NO.03A019607CV00219      )v.      ) HON.BILLSWANN      ) JUDGEJEFFREYDONALDGRISSOM,  )      ) VACATEDand Defendant/Appellant  ) REMANDED   JUDGMENT    ThisappealcameontobeheardupontherecordfromtheCircuitCourtofKnoxCountyandbriefsfiledonbehalfoftherespectiveparties.Uponconsiderationthereof,thisCourtisoftheopinionthatthereisreversibleerrorinthetrialcourt'sjudgment. Itis,therefore,ORDEREDandADJUDGEDbythisCourtthatthejudgmentofthetrialcourtisvacatedandthecaseisremandedtotheCircuitCourtofKnoxCountyfortrial.Costsareassessedtotheappellee.  PERCURIAM        INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEEASTERNSECTIONATKNOXVILLE  LORILEEGRISSOM(BROWN),  ) KNOXCIRCUIT      ) Plaintiff/Appellee   ) NO.03A019607CV00219      )v.      ) HON.BILLSWANN      ) JUDGEJEFFREYDONALDGRISSOM,  )      ) VACATEDand Defendant/Appellant  ) REMANDEDJackW.Piper,Jr.,Knoxville,forAppellant.RobertL.Crossley,Knoxville,forAppellee.   OPINION         INMAN,SeniorJudge AMaritalDissolutionAgreementwasincorporatedinadivorcejudgmententeredAugust8,1994. Aspertinenthere,theMaritalDissolutionAgreementprovided:    6.8 Husbandshallpaythewifeasalimonyinsolidothesumof$221.000.00,whichalimonyinsolidoshallbepayable$425.00perweekforten(10)yearsor520consecutiveweeks,onFridayofeachweek,beginningthefirstFridayafterthefinaljudgmentofdivorceisentered,provided,however,thealimonyinsolidomonthlypaymentsshallterminateuponthewife'sdeath.     Thewife'sremarriageonMay26,1995triggeredthisactiontomodifythejudgmentbyterminatingthealimonyrequirement.Thetrialcourtconsideredtheissueatlengthandmadeadeterminationthatordinarilyanawardofalimonyinsolidoisbeyondthereachofthecourtafterthejudgmentbecomesfinal,butinthiscase,theawardwasinfuturosincethejudgmentprovidedforitsterminationbythedeathoftherecipientandhencesubjecttomodification.  Anissueoflawispresentedandnopresumptionofcorrectnessofthetrialcourt'sjudgmentattaches.UnionCarbideCorp.v.Huddleston,854S.W.2d87,91(Tenn.1993). T.C.A.365101(a)(2)(B) !   ׀provides:    `     Inallcaseswhereapersonisreceivingalimonyinfuturooralimonytheamountofwhichisnotcalculableonthedatethedecreewasentered,andthatpersonremarries,thealimonyinfuturooralimonytheamountofwhichisnotcalculableonthedatethedecreewasentered,willterminateautomaticallyandunconditionallyupontheremarriageoftherecipient.Therecipientshallnotifytheobligoroftheremarriagetimelyuponremarriage.Failureoftherecipienttotimelygivenoticeoftheremarriagewillallowtheobligortorecoverallamountspaidasalimonyinfuturooralimonytheamountofwhichisnotcalculableonthedatethedecreewasentered,totherecipientaftertherecipient'smarriage.          Theappellantarguesthatanawardofalimonyinsolidoisnotmodifiableafterthejudgmentbecomesfinal.Wereadilyagree.SeeSpaldingv.Spalding,597S.W.2d739(Tenn.Ct.App.1980);Isbellv.Isbell,816S.W.2d735(Tenn.1991). Theappelleearguesthattheawardisinfuturobecauseoftheterminationprovision[deathofthewife],sincetheamount"isnotcalculableonthedatethedecreewasentered,"andthereforethejudgmentismodifiable,asfoundbythetrialcourt.T.C.A.365101(a)(2)(B)isapparentlyreflexivetoButcherv.Webb,869S.W.2d356(Tenn.1994),holdingthatalimonyoncepaidisnotrecoverableundertheprevailingstatutoryscheme. Wethinkthathadthetrialcourtinitiallydecreedthesubjectprovisionitwouldclearlyfallwithinthepurviewofthestatutebecausetheamountisnotcalculableonthedatethedecreewasentered;butinquirycannotstopatthispoint.ItiswellsettledinTennesseethatpartiesindomesticrelationsdisputesmaysettlepropertyrightsbetweenthemselvesconsistentwithlegalandequitablerequirements. Mar%  italDissolutionAgreementsareexpresslyprovidedfor,T.C.A.364103,anditisapublicpolicyofthisstatethattheiruseistobeencouraged.Tothatendthecourtshaveconsistentlyheldthatapropertycontractisnotsubjecttomodificationafterithasbeenapprovedbythecourt.InPenlandv.Penland,521S.W.2d227(Tenn.1975),theprinciplewasreaffirmedthataMaritalDissolutionAgreementprovisionlostitscontractualnatureifitwasbylawsubjecttomodification.Otherwise,itremainedabindingcontract.Typically,agreementsastochildandspousalsupportconstitute,asapracticalmatter,thosesubjecttomodification;alimonyinsolidoisgenerallynevermodifiablebecauseitisapartofthepropertydivisionscheme.SeeVanattav.Vanatta,701S.W.2d824(Tenn.Ct.App.1985). Butsuperimposedupontheseprinciplesisonethatisessentiallytranscendent:toascertaintheintentofthepartiesasexpressedintheagreement,asdistinguishedfromadecretalfinding.Inmanyinstancessuchintentwillbederivedfromthelanguageemployed,becausepartiestoacontractwillnotbeallowedtostultifythemselves,absentacompellingcircumstance;butiftheprovisionisambiguous,extrinsicevidencemayproperlybeadducedtoresolvetheelementofintent.SeeBobPearsallMotorsv.RegalChryslerPlymouth,Inc.,521S.W.2d578(Tenn.1975);Taylorv.WhiteStores,Inc.,707S.W.2d514(Tenn.Ct.App.1985). TheappellantforcefullyarguesthatthesepartiesnegotiatedtheMaritalDissolutionAgreementwiththeassistanceofknowledgeablecounselwhoadvisedthemwithrespecttotheimpactofthelanguageemployed,andstressesthesingularreferenceto"alimonyinsolido"ascontrastedtoalimonyinfuturoortorehabilitativealimony.Inappositetothisargumentisthestarkpresenceofthestatutewhichprimafacie'converts'thealimonyinsolidotoanawardofalimonyinfuturo. Wecannotsacrificesubstancetoform,Selfv.Self,861S.W.2d360(Tenn.1993),andconcludethatanevidentiaryhearingisrequiredinordertodeterminetheintentionoftheseparties,andtoarriveatthejusticeofthecase.Accordingly,thejudgmentisvacatedandthecaseisremandedfortrial.Costsareassessedtotheappellee.      ______________________________       WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudge              CONCUR:_____________________________________HoustonM.Goddard,PresidingJudge_____________________________________HerschelP.Franks,Judge