ÿWPC' ZRû.ô€|97˜¿QYiš{ãqY.üü²«ïNŽòÅ“o¨NÁí%º²–Ý”M¾ëŒ"UÙø.Îp#Tṋdü…¶“û €'¡ ÎÿÜ©Êk® =Khá›T"Nýrbªò]UÁA¸WñçØµ1-½¨1193Ÿ¸ˆg±wi øÇ™ëll“þ-«$›½¾% Z!Ý´BuEñ; pò7Ķ’È¡xþ#Vá¿§—-rÔšuHï¾UÉç«)WȪåšÄ·ä+ŽW2/=Ní˜TôýWŒk²m¶»¶ÈA&¯’Pfßß3O©ñ‚bá¦?BáîRÛ1°“ŸN` F(>ô÷Lž38„¥Õ®* ÇÆ˜RºÖÔE¿ËY‚&i€š³t›%sb.ÜSÏÃeÙîÕ9Ã[(²qßW›6îúüŽ9 ÖÅ–«ÎÊNKxŧòAukÂs¶¯I ½+˜tc\·jg²'TbdUy"½é§ôý iï6~ Vt9ÿvÎ]ÖVxoœ9šÄKؾ5üj4ñºáŒKëÌW[þì‚¡Ú•™—‡íj^>wq,gkZ5ÿLƒöIKXÉÈ*ò²ìðã“&*ì3ÙKQeRˆHع»RÍ #!¶UN× %% 0(+w@S4“§¶UN¾N  m˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ †D‡ˆD‰ŠD‹DŒ/VŽVV{Z='3|x(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑò òÔ‡ X;XXXÔÑ8€;XXdìdÈ8ÑÔ_Ôà@ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óˆÐ ° Ðò òà@kk%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌóóÌMARYBETH€HOGAN,à  àà h àà À à)à  àà p àÐ L œ Ðó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò ò)ó óÐ 8 ˆ Ðà  àPlaintiff/Appellant,à  àà h àà À àò ò)à  àó óMadison€Chancery€No.€49665€€€€€Ð $ t Ðò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ó óà  àà p àÐ  d Ðò òv.à  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  à€Ð  P  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àó óAppeal€No.€02A01„9905„CH„00119ò òÐ ì <  ÐGEORGE€LAWSON€YARBRO,à h àà À à)à  àÐ Ü,  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àó óDefendant/Appellee.à  àò òà h àà À à)Ð ´  Ðà  àó óòòÌóóò òÌÌÌà@€€ìàó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€MADISON€COUNTYˆÐ T¤ Ðà@(( ìàAT€JACKSON,€TENNESSEEˆÌÌÌà@ ìàTHE€HONORABLE€JOE€C.€MORRIS,€CHANCELLORˆÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/Appellantóó:òòà  àà h àà À àFor€the€Defendant/Appelleeóó:òòÐ ´ ÐÌóóJoy€Tanner€Bomar€€€€€€à  àà h àà À àStephen€M.€Milam€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ŒÜ ÐMemphis,€Tennessee€€€€à  àà h àà À àLexington,€TennesseeÐ xÈ Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌÌò òÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð °($' ÐÌÌÌCONCURS:ÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.Ð 8.ˆ)- ÐÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÔ#†X;XX X;~#ÔÐ  ü0L,0 ÐØØÑ8€;XXdìXXdì8ÑÑ  Ñà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ ° ÐÌÓÓà  àà ` àThis€is€a€post„divorce€action.€€The€mother€filed€a€petition€to€enforce€the€provisionsÏof€the€marital€dissolution€agreement.€€The€agreement€provided€for€payment€of€attorneyððs€fees€andÏcosts€for€legal€action€to€enforce€the€marital€dissolution€agreement.€The€trial€court€denied€the€motherððsÏrequest€for€attorneyððs€fees€and€costs.€€We€reverse€and€remand.Ìà  àMarybeth€Hogan€(ð ðMotherðð)€and€George€Lawson€Yarbro,€M.D.€(ð ðFatherðð)€divorced€on€JuneÏ30,€1995,€after€ten€years€of€marriage.€€Father€was€a€physician€with€The€Jackson€Clinic€(ð ðClinicðð).€ÏThe€divorce€decree€incorporated€in€its€entirety€a€marital€dissolution€agreement€(ð ðMDAðð€orÏð ðagreementðð)€entered€into€on€June€14,€1995.€€In€the€MDA,€€the€parties€agreed€òòinter€aliaóó€that€MotherÐ pÀ Ðwould€have€sole€custody€of€the€partiesðð€son€and€daughter,€with€Father€entitled€to€liberal€visitation;Ïthat€Father€would€pay€$3,582.50€per€month€in€child€support;€that€Father€would€pay€$3,582.50€perÏmonth€for€seven€years€as€rehabilitative€alimony;€that€Father€would€pay€Motherððs€graduate€schoolÏtuition,€books,€and€related€costs,€as€further€rehabilitative€alimony;€and€that€Father€would€provideÏeach€child€with€transportation€and€automobile€insurance,€beginning€as€he€or€she€reached€16€years€ofÏage.€€The€agreement€also€contained€an€enforcement€provision:ÌÓ Óà8  àà ` àò òEnforcement€of€Agreement/Attorneyððs€Fees€and€Costs.ó ó€€In€the€event€itÐ X ¨ Ðbecomes€reasonably€necessary€for€either€party€to€institute€legal€proceedings€toÏprocure€the€enforcement€of€any€provision€of€this€Agreement,€the€parties€agree€that€theÏsuccessful€party€shall€also€be€entitled€to€a€judgment€for€reasonable€expenses,Ïincluding€attorneyððs€fees,€incurred€in€prosecuting€the€action.ÓÓÐ Ð Ð  Ðà  àOn€July€8,€1997,€Mother€filed€a€petition€seeking€modification€of€the€divorce€decree,€a€citationÏfor€contempt,€and€temporary€injunctive€relief.€€She€alleged€that€Father€had€repeatedly€told€their€son,ÏReid,€that€he€wanted€nothing€to€do€with€him,€and€that€because€of€Fatherððs€behavior,€neither€childÏwanted€to€visit€Father.€€She€also€alleged€that€Father€had€failed€to€make€the€required€child€support€andÏrehabilitative€alimony€payments.€€She€asked€that€the€trial€court€find€Father€in€contempt,€order€aÏgarnishment€of€his€wages€from€the€Clinic€to€cover€his€monthly€child€support€and€alimonyÏobligations,€suspend€his€visitation€privileges€with€the€children€until€he€successfully€completedÏcounseling,€and€award€her€attorneyððs€fees.Ìà  àOn€July€13,€1998,€the€trial€court€issued€an€order€on€Motherððs€petition.€€Because€FatherÏacknowledged€that€he€was€$9,175.36€in€arrears€in€his€payments€to€Mother,€the€trial€court€found€thatÏhe€was€not€in€willful€contempt€regarding€the€arrearage.€€The€trial€court€ordered€Father€and€MotherÏto€meet€with€a€counselor,€for€co„parenting€instruction€and€for€the€purposes€of€ð ðre„establishing€aÏrelationshipðð€between€the€children€and€Father€ð ðon€whatever€terms€are€appropriate€for€the€childrenÐ