ÿWPCh —‚â¼¶Ù씵Ž"‚·;ü£àɉ*0tÀAåóŸpíRžü3¶_<¼„’¡Ö{")mm/µø½àôÂ\LºLâq™Ð2eàÔlàû]MäÓN´@²0µƒ~P“©ùépߢôg½…pw´,˜ÇÆ FÛ<ÉÂÆãbZc˜ÿôXž€ÛpyÃ~Þ†¼º› ÍÖa<þ@2ºGk[¥>il€¸?¡JQtØ#zã‹Vª=ø”m¥ï ˜ÞZÌ GÆ£Rˆ|Ó{ã$S$©Ž)| ïÓ¤ Ùdͦšm•!”á©lòòW˜‡º"Z™)â}nø²)bLð[-Õ ÚÓ²>YˆM'}ãiÍQ;Jã8Å1Gºk¶k¯J;c+f9¾¤Pe¹ó/ŠmT8RË4:©"ŸüI- s¤@Yîk^ÃêÔ†¯f×-l42dR±úÔý€F{5ŸMßGÛ2úƒ¹Î¬ø•dQò§¸—f·ïJÅßÈyø±êš˜ƒÞÊ=±.¼]Ìʽ5ɘ9`Æ8‚Ddì@Mm’iR„1òµ‚>Ö–4Åo•—¤=$x‰ôÑZ$«×XÎÍ °É½'z#ãÁíbw2Øñ?ÅîËy °‚1aúùC'ïq`# @U NK %™ 0(Ÿw@Ç4  * D bL /T Nƒ 0P… ^ Õ á mã ßú 0°Ù 0D‰šÍUNgßµ”I•UNÞ.,UNZU:¨¨¨ Bâ AQÿÆP 0D 0DZZ D/žž BÍ D3êêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêêê 0D Aa D?â BG!˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ —E˜™Ó€šÓ€›DœDDžDŸÓ€©©yË&tttttt3|x©waiver- ù- %Ý ƒÇŸ$ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà Ø àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼ß)»XXÔThe€trial€court€awarded€the€divorce€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€maritalÐ ° Ðconduct.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ðð36„4„101(11).€While€conviction€of€and€incarcerationÏfor€a€felony€constitutes€a€separate€ground€for€divorce,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð36„4„¼101€(6),€criminal€activity€resulting€in€conviction€and€incarceration€is€clearlyÏinappropriate€marital€conduct.((3/Q$««Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ d Ô˜žÕ&ˆ ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ÕÝ ƒÇŸ$ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà Ø àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼ß)»XXÔDivorce€cases€are€not€the€type€of€civil€proceeding€in€which€the€State€isÐ ° Ðrequired€to€cover€the€expense€of€€providing€in€forma€pauperis€litigants€withÏtranscripts.€€òòSee€M.L.B.€v.€S.L.J.,óó€519€U.S.__,€117€S.Ct.€555,€568,€136€L.Ed.2dÐ Ô$ Ð473€(1997).(`(2ÇŸ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑÑà Ø àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó GOODALL€TURNEYSherrod WixDevorakTurney L.EdBaggettamount[edTolbertBursonBlountA]ppellateCrabtreeWhisnantTAKACS HENDERSONVILLET.R.A.P.M.L.B.S.L.J.(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular ÕÝ ƒÇŸ$ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà Ø àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼, ¼XXÔDivorce€cases€are€not€the€type€of€civil€proceeding€in€which€the€State€isÐ ° Ðrequired€to€cover€the€expense€of€€providing€in€forma€pauperis€litigants€withÏtranscripts.€€òòSee€M.L.B.€v.€S.L.J.,óó€519€U.S.__,€117€S.Ct.€555,€568,€136€L.Ed.2d€473Ð Ð  Ð(1997). ÷Ý ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XKHXXXÔÔ€”PXXKHÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XKHX”PÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€1,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó ?Ñ#€º€»ÿÿd#ÑØØØØ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular $Ý ƒÇŸ$ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà Ø àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼, ¼XXÔThe€trial€court€awarded€the€divorce€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€maritalÐ ° Ðconduct.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ðð36„4„101(11).€While€conviction€of€and€incarcerationÏfor€a€felony€constitutes€a€separate€ground€for€divorce,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð36„4„101Ï(6),€criminal€activity€resulting€in€conviction€and€incarceration€is€clearlyÏinappropriate€marital€conduct.(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d!"T$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝT^yúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ‡¼¬%¼XXÔÓ'€Ð‡Xè“X°œX'ÓÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ  ÑÑ€ÃÑñ©ññŸñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` 8ttxP,°ð  rßñŸññ©ññ©ñßt€ )>.*jxsýÿ` `€€@EL°` 8ttxP„°( tßñ©ñà@& & êàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@‚‚(êàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌó óÌCHERYL€LYNN€(DOUGLAS)à  à)Ð ê: ÐHUMPHREYà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ú J Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)ÌÓ6€ü(‚X˜‘X€Ð‡Xè“X6Óà Ø àPlaintiff/Appellee,à  à)à  àAppeal€No.Ð  j Ðà Ø àà  à)à  à01„A„01„9802„CV„00109€Ð * z Ðv.à Ø àà  à)Ð :Š  Ðà Ø àà  à)à  àSumner€County€Circuit€CourtÐ Jš  Ðà Ø àà  à)à  àNo.€17425„CÐ Zª  ÐDAVID€ARNOLD€HUMPHREYà  à)Ð jº  Ðà Ø àà  à)à  àÐ zÊ  Ðà Ø àDefendant/Appellant.à  à)Ð ŠÚ Ðà Ø àà  à)ÌÌÌÔ#†XFiX¼¼¬%G#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€¼¬%¼XXFiÔCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ Ê ÐÌAPPEAL€FROM€THE€€CIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€€SUMNER€COUNTYÌÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€GOODALL,€PRESIDING€ÌÓ9°,X‚Xì“X€ü(‚X˜‘X9ÓÌÌÓ  ÓÌDAVID€ARNOLD€HUMPHREYÌTURNEY€CENTER€4B/20ÌROUTE€ONEÌONLY,€TENNESSEE€€37140„9709ÌÌDEFENDANT/APPELLANTÌà Ø àPRO„SEÌÌÌTIMOTHY€L.€TAKACSÌ201€WALTON€FERRY€ROADÌHENDERSONVILLE,€TENNESSEE€37077„0364ÌÌATTORNEY€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLEEÌÌÌà@ùùêàò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PART€AND€REMANDEDó óˆÐ Z2ª-+ ÐÌÌà Ø àà ¼ àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌCANTRELL,€J.ÌKOCH,€J.ÌñŸñÑÃÑÑ7€,&»»dXXdì7ÑØØØØÑ  ÑÑÃÑÑ#€º€»ÿÿd#ÑØØØØÑ  ÑñŸñÐ Ø:(63— ÐÑÃÑÑ7€,&»»dXXdì7ÑØØØØÑ  ÑñŸñÑÃÑâ âÑ8€ß)»»dXXdì8ÑØØØØâ âÑ  ÑñŸñÔ_ÔÓÓà@||+êàò òÔ‡°±b°¼¼¬%ÔOPINIONÔ#†¼¬%¼°°±b- #Ôó óˆÐ ° ÐÓ9°,X°4ì“X°,X‚Xì“X9Óà  àAppellant€David€A.€Humphrey€commenced€this€pro€se€appeal€toÏchallenge€the€trial€court's€Final€Decree€granting€a€divorce€to€Appellee€CherylÏLynn€(Douglas)€Humphrey€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€HeÏasserts€that€the€divorce€should€have€been€granted€to€him€or€the€court€should€haveÏsimply€declared€the€parties€divorced.€€He€also€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€childÏcustody€and€visitation€order,€asking€that€in€person€visitation€be€required.€€Finally,Ïhe€objects€to€the€assessment€of€costs€against€him.Ìà  àMs.€Humphrey€filed€her€complaint€for€absolute€divorce€on€SeptemberÏ3,€1997,€alleging€irreconcilable€differences.€€She€amended€the€complaint€onÏNovember€24,€1997€to€assert€an€additional€allegation€that€Mr.€Humphrey€wasÏguilty€of€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€On€December€18,€1997,€Mr.€HumphreyÏmoved€for€an€extension€of€time€to€answer€the€complaint,€arguing€that€due€to€hisÏlack€of€education,€indigence,€and€incarceration€he€required€an€additional€monthÏto€retain€the€assistance€of€the€prison€law€clerk€to€aid€him€in€preparing€an€answer,Ïto€conduct€factual€and€legal€research,€and€to€gather€information.Ìà  àOn€January€6,€1998,€the€trial€court€issued€an€order€stating€that€it€would€Ïhold€a€hearing€on€Mr.€Humphrey's€motion€for€extension€of€time€on€January€20,Ï1998€to€be€conducted€by€telephone€to€permit€his€participation.€€Ìà  àOn€January€20,€1998,€both€Mr.€Humphrey€and€an€advisor€participatedÏin€the€hearing€over€the€telephone.€€During€the€hearing,€Mr.€Humphrey€indicatedÏthat€he€required€the€extension€of€time€to€secure€certain€material€facts€pertainingÏto€the€sale€of€the€parties'€real€estate€which€had€occurred€some€years€before€theÏcomplaint€for€divorce€was€filed.€€Mr.€Humphrey€also€admitted€that€he€wasÏincarcerated€for€a€felony€involving€a€drug„related€offense.Ð 89ˆ40 Ðà  àOn€January€22,€1998,€the€trial€court€issued€the€Final€Decree€of€Divorce,Ïgranting€Ms.€Humphrey€the€relief€sought€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€maritalÏconduct.€€This€finding€was€primarily€premised€on€€Mr.€Humphrey's€admissionÏregarding€the€reason€for€his€incarceration,€the€felony€drug€conviction.€€€WhileÏMs.€Humphrey€was€awarded€custody€of€the€couple's€minor€children,€Mr.ÏHumphrey€received€reasonable€visitation.€€The€decree€awarded€no€alimony.€€ItÏstated€that€the€parties€had€no€marital€debt€and€no€marital€property.€€€It€found€thatÏMr.€Humphrey€was€under€no€present€duty€to€pay€child€support€because€of€hisÏincarceration€and€lack€of€income.Ìà  àThis€decree€also€denied€Mr.€Humphrey's€motion€for€extension€of€time,Ïfinding€that€material€relating€to€the€real€estate€transaction€was€not€necessary€inÏorder€to€file€an€answer.€€However,€the€trial€court€directed€Ms.€Humphrey€toÏprovide€to€Mr.€Humphrey€the€information€he€sought€regarding€the€transaction.€ÏIt€also€specifically€informed€the€parties€that€nothing€in€the€decree€prevented€Mr.ÏHumphrey€from€bringing€an€independent€action€complaining€of€fraud€andÏirregularities€in€the€real€estate€transaction.€€€Mr.€Humphrey€filed€a€timely€noticeÏof€appeal€from€this€order.à ¼ àÐ ð&@"  Ðà  àAlthough€Mr.€Humphrey€filed€a€notice€of€filing€transcript€on€March€13,Ï1998,€the€clerk€of€€court€noted€on€this€filing€that,€"No€transcript€of€theÏproceedings€has€been€filed€in€this€court€as€of€March€13,€1998."€€On€March€19,Ï1998,€Mr.€Humphrey€filed€a€motion€to€transcribe€proceedings.€€After€anÏadditional€hearing€in€which€Mr.€Humphrey€participated€by€telephone,€€the€trialÏcourt€denied€Mr.€Humphrey's€motion€to€have€a€transcript€of€the€January€20Ïhearing€prepared€because€no€contemporaneous€stenographic€record€or€audio€tapeÏwas€made€of€those€proceedings.€€Additionally,€no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24€(c)Ð 8`30 ÐStatement€of€the€Evidence€has€been€filed.€€Therefore,€this€case€is€before€this€courtÏon€the€Technical€Record.Ìà  àIn€addition,€Appellant€has€filed€a€brief.€€Rather€than€responding€to€theÏarguments€in€Appellantððs€brief,€Ms.€Humphrey's€trial€counsel€€filed€a€documentÏstyled€"Notice"€which€stated€that€Ms.€Humphrey€was€unable€to€bear€the€expenseÏof€retaining€counsel€to€file€a€brief€on€her€behalf.€€The€"Notice"€also€stated€thatÏthis€appeal€lacked€merit€because€the€trial€court€committed€no€errors€and€Mr.ÏHumphrey€violated€various€rules€of€appellate€procedure.€€Additionally,€Ms.ÏHumphrey€requested€oral€argument€if€this€court€did€not€dismiss€the€appeal.€€UponÏreview€of€this€"Notice"€and€other€motions,€this€court€granted€Ms.€HumphreyÏadditional€time€in€which€to€file€a€suitable€brief,€warning€that€the€appeal€would€beÏconsidered€upon€the€record€and€brief€on€file€if€she€failed€to€do€so.€€Inasmuch€asÏMs.€Humphrey€failed€to€file€a€brief,€this€court€entered€an€order€that€this€matterÏbe€considered€upon€the€record€and€brief€on€file.Ìà  àIn€his€pro€se€appellate€brief,€Mr.€Humphrey€raises€six€issues.€€HeÏmaintains€the€trial€court€erred€in€(1)€denying€€his€motion€for€an€extension€of€timeÏto€file€an€answer;€(2)€failing€to€hold€a€"final"€hearing€on€the€divorce€complaint;Ï(3)€failing€to€grant€him,€rather€than€Ms.€Humphrey,€a€divorce;€(4)€taxing€costsÏagainst€him€after€permitting€him€to€proceed€in€forma€pauperis;€(5)€closing€theÏcase€when€some€issues€were€unresolved;€and€(6)€failing€to€grant€him€visitationÏwith€his€children.Ìà@¦¦-êàI.ˆÌà  àAs€a€preliminary€matter€concerning€the€scope€of€this€appeal,€weÏobserve€that€this€case€triggers€two€well„settled€legal€principles.€€First,€the€absenceÏof€a€transcript€of€the€divorce€hearing€or€€a€proper€statement€of€the€evidenceÐ 8`30 Ðmeans€the€facts€found€by€the€trial€court€are€conclusively€presumed€to€be€correct.€ÏòòSee€J.€C.€Bradford€&€Co.€v.€Martin€Constr.€Co.óó,€576€S.W.2d€586€(Tenn.€1979).€Ð Ô$ ÐMr.€Humphrey's€failure€to€satisfy€his€burden€of€arranging€for€a€transcript€of€theÏproceedings€or€filing€a€certified€statement€of€the€unrecorded€proceedings€inÏcompliance€with€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24€(c)€binds€us€to€that€presumption.ñ”ñ׃×ñ”ññ”ñ׃×ñ”ñÝ ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€òò€SeeÐ @  ÐSherrod€v.€Wixóó,€849€S.W.2d€780,€783€(Tenn.€App.€€1992);€òòsee€State€v.€Bunchóó,Ð d´  Ð646€S.W.2d€158,€160€(Tenn.€1983).€€€Our€analysis€is€limited€to€those€issuesÏwhich€can€be€decided€based€solely€on€the€technical€record.€€Second,€appellateÏcourts€generally€decline€to€address€issues€raised€for€the€first€time€on€appeal.€€òòSeeÐ Ð  ÐBook„Mart€of€Florida€v.€National€Book€Warehouse,óó€917€S.W.2d€691,€694€(Tenn.Ð ôD ÐApp.€1995).€€Thus,€€those€issues€which€do€not€appear€to€have€been€raised€in€theÏtrial€court€are€deemed€waived.€€òòSee€Devorak€v.€Pattersonóó,€907€S.W.2d€815,€818Ð <Œ Ð(Tenn.€App.€1995).€Ìà@-êàII.ˆÌà  àMr.€Humphrey€first€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€hisÏMotion€for€Extension€of€Time€within€which€to€respond.€€After€being€served€withÏthe€Complaint€for€Divorce€(which€alleged€irreconcilable€differences€as€grounds)Ïand€the€Amended€Complaint€(which€also€alleged€that€Appellant€had€been€guiltyÏof€inappropriate€marital€conduct),€Mr.€Humphrey€filed€a€motion€for€extension€ofÏtime€within€which€to€respond.€€The€stated€bases€for€the€extension€were€the€needÏto€secure€help€from€the€law€clerk€at€the€prison€facility€and€the€need€to€ð ðsecureÏsubstantial€material€facts€and€documented€support€relevant€to€these€matters.ðð€€ByÏOrder€dated€January€6,€1998,€the€trial€court€set€a€hearing€on€the€motion€forÐ È3/, Ðextension€of€time€for€January€20€to€include€telephone€participation€by€Mr.ÏHumphrey.Ìà  àThe€Final€Decree€of€Divorce€reflects€that€the€January€20€hearingÏbecame€a€hearing€on€the€merits€of€the€divorce.€€The€Decree€reflects€that€Mr.ÏHumphrey,€along€with€an€advisor,€participated€via€telephone€from€TurneyÏCenter,€where€Mr.€Humphrey€was€incarcerated.Ìà  àAs€discussed€above,€since€there€is€no€transcript€of€the€January€20Ïhearing€and€no€Statement€of€the€Evidence€from€that€hearing,€this€court€mustÏpresume€that€any€factual€findings€by€the€trial€court€are€correct.€€In€the€Decree,€theÏtrial€court€found€that€Mr.€Humphrey€had€requested€the€extension€in€order€toÏsecure€information€relevant€to€the€sale€of€the€partiesðð€marital€residence€a€fewÏyears€earlier€and€had€suggested€that€fraud€may€have€occurred€in€that€transaction.€ÏThe€court€then€held,€ð ðThe€Husband€has€made€no€showing€satisfactory€to€theÏCourt€that€he€cannot€file€an€Answer€and€obtain€the€requested€information€byÏnormal€discovery€process."€€The€court€also€stated,€ð ðNothing€in€this€OrderÏprevents€or€prohibits€the€Husband€from€bringing€an€independent,€meritoriousÏaction€complaining€of€any€irregularities€or€fraud€in€that€real€estate€transaction.ððÌà  àThe€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€by€denying€Mr.€Humphrey'sÏmotion€for€extension€of€time€to€answer.€€òòTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€€6.02;€see€also€Blake€v.Ð 8+ˆ&$ ÐPlus€Mark,€Inc.óó,€952€S.W.2d€413,€415€(Tenn.€1997).€€We€agree€with€the€trialÐ \-¬(& Ðcourt€that€the€information€Mr.€Humphrey€sought€was€not€required€in€order€toÏanswer€the€complaint€and€that€nothing€prevented€Mr.€Humphrey€from€obtainingÏthe€information€through€normal€discovery€procedures.€€Ìà  àMore€problematic€than€the€denial€of€the€motion€for€extension,€however,Ïare€the€trial€courtððs€actions€following€that€denial.€€Having€set€a€hearing€on€theÐ 8`30 Ðextension€of€time€for€January€20,€a€date€after€the€due€date€for€the€answer,€theÏcourt€denied€the€extension€on€January€20,€found€that€Mr.€Humphreyððs€responseÏwas€past€due,€and€proceeded€to€hear€the€merits€of€the€case€without€prior€noticeÏto€Mr.€Humphrey.€€The€court€did€not€allow€Mr.€Humphrey€to€file€an€Answer€orÏto€conduct€the€discovery€the€court€mentioned.Ìà  àWhile€Mr.€Humphrey€raises€as€issues€the€trial€courtððs€failure€to€hold€aÏð ðfinal€hearingðð€and€the€courtððs€closing€of€the€case€with€issues€still€pending,€thoseÏclaims€appear€to€be€based€on€a€misapprehension€as€to€the€nature€of€the€hearingÏheld€January€20€and€of€the€Final€Decree€of€Divorce€entered€January€22.€ÏTherefore,€Mr.€Humphreyððs€real€complaint€is€not€the€lack€of€final€action€by€theÏcourt,€because€the€trial€courtððs€decree€was€a€final€action.€€Rather,€it€is€hisÏcontention€€that€he€did€not€receive€proper€notice€of€the€divorce€hearing€inÏviolation€of€his€due€process€rights.€He€claims€the€lack€of€notice€left€himÏunprepared€for€the€divorce€hearing.€€à ¼ àÐ „ Ô Ðà  àAdequate€notice€is€essential€to€due€process€because€the€right€to€aÏhearing€has€little€meaning€unless€the€affected€parties€are€informed€of€the€natureÏof€the€matter€to€be€heard€and€can€choose€for€themselves€whether€to€appear€orÏdefault,€acquiesce€or€contest.€€òòSee€Greene€v.€Lindseyóó,€456€U.S.€444,€449,€102Ð )d$" ÐS.Ct.€1874,€72€L.Ed.2d€249)€€(1982);òò€see€Baggett€v.€Baggettóó,€541€S.W.2d€407,Ð 8+ˆ&$ Ð410€(Tenn.€1976)€(divorce€cases€fall€within€the€purview€of€the€due€processÏclause).€€"Though€incarceration€necessarily€limits€a€prisoner's€right€to€be€heardÏby€personal€appearance,€it€does€not€preclude€him€from€receiving€the€same€noticeÏof€actions€against€him€that€is€afforded€to€citizens€who€are€not€under€sentence."€ÏòòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€€No.€01„A001„9510„CV„00480,€1996€WL€563877,€*2€(Tenn.Ð ì5<1. ÐApp.€October€4,€1996)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).Ð 8`30 Ðà  àThe€record€shows€that€the€trial€court€issued€an€order€on€January€6,€1998Ïsetting€a€hearing€on€the€motion€for€extension€of€time€for€January€20.€€The€divorceÏdecree,€issued€January€22,€indicates€that€the€hearing€on€the€divorce€occurred€onÏJanuary€20.€€Nothing€in€the€record€shows€that€Appellant€received€any€notice€thatÏthe€divorce€hearing€was€to€be€held€simultaneously€with€the€hearing€on€his€motionÏfor€extension€of€time.€€While€it€appears€the€trial€court€consolidated€the€two€issues€Ïbecause€the€answer€was€due€prior€to€the€hearing,€Mr.€Humphrey's€failure€toÏanswer€did€not€automatically€entitle€Ms.€Humphrey€to€a€default€judgment.€€òòSeeóóÐ ¬ü ÐTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€55.01.€€Ìà  àThe€issues€raised€by€Mr.€Humphrey€must€be€analyzed€in€conjunctionÏwith€the€relief€he€seeks€and/or€the€harm€he€claims€to€have€suffered.€€In€thisÏappeal,€Mr.€Humphrey€asserts€that€the€divorce€should€have€been€awarded€to€himÏor,€alternatively,€that€the€parties€should€have€been€declared€divorced€pursuant€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„129€(Supp.€1998).€€He€further€asserts€that,€given€theÏopportunity,€he€would€have€presented€evidence€of€adultery€by€Ms.€Humphrey.ÏHowever,€nothing€in€the€record€reflects€that€Mr.€Humphrey€voiced€theseÏconcerns€to€the€trial€court.Ìà  àAlthough€the€lack€of€notice€on€the€divorce€issue€is€troubling,€additionalÏtime€or€proper€notice€would€not€have€altered€the€fact€that€Ms.€Humphrey€wasÏentitled€to€a€divorce.€The€trial€court€clearly€granted€the€divorce€on€the€basis€ofÏMr.€Humphrey's€own€admission€that€he€was€incarcerated€on€a€felony€drug€count.ñ”ñ׃ ×ñ”ññ”ñ׃×ñ”ñÝ ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р€/Ð*( ÐòòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€€36„4„101€(6)€(Supp.€1998).òò€óó€His€"admission€that€he€hadÐ ¤1ô,* Ðbeen€convicted€of€an€infamous€crime€and€had€been€incarcerated€.€€.€€.€amount[ed]Ïto€a€stipulation€of€grounds€for€divorce€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„129€(a)."€Ï€òòTuttle€v.€Tuttleóó,€€No.€01A01„9512„CV„00546,€1997€WL€629956,€*€2€(Tenn.€App.Ð øH ÐOctober€10,€1997)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€Ìà  à€Because€nothing€in€the€technical€record€indicates€that€Mr.€HumphreyÏraised€the€contention€that€he€required€the€extension€of€time€to€assert€his€ownÏgrounds€for€divorce,€this€argument€is€deemed€waived.€€òòSee€Devorakóó,€907€S.W.2dÐ ˆØ  Ðat€818.€€Additionally,€Mr.€Humphrey€does€not€assert€that€he€has€or€could€haveÏraised€any€defense€to€the€divorce€on€the€grounds€of€his€conviction€of€a€felony.€ÏHe€simply€wanted€to€present€evidence€of€marital€misconduct€by€Ms.€Humphrey.€ÏHis€complaint€is€not€that€the€divorce€was€granted,€but€that€it€was€granted€to€Ms.ÏHumphrey.Ìà  àEven€if€it€were€error€for€the€trial€court€to€hear€the€merits€of€the€caseÏwithout€proper€notice,€Mr.€Humphrey€has€failed€to€show€how€he€was€harmed€byÏthe€granting€of€the€divorce€to€Ms.€Humphrey.€€Under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„¼129,€the€trial€court€has€discretion€to€award€a€divorce€to€the€party€ð ðless€at€fault.ðð€ÏAdditionally,€relative€fault€of€the€parties€is€relevant€only€to€awards€of€alimony,Ïand€none€was€awarded€in€this€case.€€Mr.€Humphrey€must€show€both€error€andÏharm.€€òòSee€Scott€v.€Jones€Bros.€Constr.,€Inc.,óó€960€S.W.2d€589,€594€(Tenn.€App.Ð 8+ˆ&$ Ð1997).€€No€interest€of€the€parties€(both€of€whom€want€to€be€divorced)€and€noÏpublic€policy€interest€would€be€furthered€by€our€reversing€the€judgment€ofÏdivorce.€€Mr.€Humphrey€has€not€requested€such€relief.€€Because€he€has€shown€noÏharm€to€him€caused€by€the€granting€of€the€divorce€to€this€former€wife,€we€holdÏthat€any€error€of€the€trial€court€was€harmless.ÌÐ 8`30 Їà@XX,êàIII.ˆÌà  àThe€trial€court's€ruling€regarding€marital€property,€however,€presentsÏgreater€difficulties.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€parties€had€no€marital€property.€ÏWhile€ordinarily€this€court€would€presume€that€factual€finding€to€be€correct€in€theÏabsence€of€a€Statement€of€the€Evidence€or€a€hearing€transcript,€the€Final€DecreeÏitself€indicates€that€Mr.€Humphrey€had€questions€and€concerns€about€the€sale€ofÏthe€marital€residence€which€occurred€while€he€was€in€prison.€€€In€fact,€the€trialÏcourt€found€that€Mr.€Humphrey€wanted€to€discover€information€or€factsÏregarding€that€transaction.€€The€court€ordered€Ms.€Humphrey€to€supply€Mr.ÏHumphrey€with€information€regarding€the€sale€of€the€residence€within€ten€(10)Ïdays€after€the€entry€of€the€Final€Decree€in€which€the€court€found€that€no€maritalÏproperty€existed.Ìà  àIt€is€apparent€that€Mr.€Humphrey€wanted€an€opportunity€to€inquire€intoÏand€present€evidence€regarding€the€sale€of€the€house€and,€consequently,€theÏdisposition€of€the€proceeds€from€that€sale.€€Although€the€trial€court€was€aware€ofÏMr.€Humphrey's€concerns€on€this€issue,€the€court€proceeded€with€the€hearingÏwithout€prior€notice€to€Mr.€Humphrey€and€without€giving€him€the€opportunityÏto€attempt€discovery€on€this€issue,€thereby€denying€him€any€real€opportunity€toÏpresent€evidence€on€this€issue.€€Under€the€limited€circumstances€of€this€case,€weÏcannot€say€that€additional€time€to€garner€evidence€or€proper€notice€of€the€subjectÏmatter€of€the€hearing€would€not€have€altered€the€outcome€of€the€trial€court'sÏdecision€on€the€division€of€property.€€See€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36€(b).€€Nor€can€weÏsay€that€the€proceedings€under€which€the€division€of€property€was€adjudicatedÏdid€not€involve€a€substantial€right€or€result€in€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.€ÏòòId.,€see€Tolbert€v.€Tolbertóó,€No.€03A01„9406„CV„00230,€1994€WL€705230,€Ô_Ô*1Ð 8`30 Ð(Tenn.€App.,€€December€15,€1994)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€€ÏAccordingly,€we€reverse€the€trial€court's€findings€relating€to€the€division€ofÏproperty€and€remand€for€a€hearing€on€the€matter€in€which€Mr.€Humphrey€shallÏreceive€all€the€process€due€him.Ìà@RR-êàIV.ˆÌà  àMr.€Humphrey€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€assessing€costsÏagainst€him€as€an€indigent€litigant.€€Because€the€record€contains€no€showing€thatÏMr.€Humphrey€raised€this€issue€in€the€trial€court,€it€is€deemed€waived.€€€òòSee€CivilÐ ¬ü ÐService€Merit€Bd.€v.€Burson,€óó816€S.W.2d€725,€734„35€(Tenn.€1991).€€Ð Ð  Ðà  àFurthermñññŽñrñŽñññoññrññe,€while€it€is€elementary€that€a€person€may€proceed€withoutÏbond€upon€a€finding€of€indigence,€that€status€does€not€relieve€a€litigant€of€theÏobligation€to€pay€costsñ“ñ€incurred€in€the€prosecution€of€an€actionñ“ñ.€€€òòSee€Roberts€v.Ð <Œ ÐBlount€Memorial€Hosp.,óó€963€S.W.2d€744,€749€(Tenn.€App.€1997);€òòPurdue€v.Ð `° ÐGreen€Branch€Mining€Co.,€Inc.,óó€837€S.W.2d€56,€60€(Tenn.€1992)€("[A]ppellateÐ „ Ô Ðcourts€are€generally€disinclined€to€interfere€with€a€trial€court's€decision€inÏassessing€costs€unless€there€is€€a€clear€abuse€of€discretion.");òò€see€óóTenn.€CodeÐ Ì$  ÐAnn.€ðð€20„12„119€(b)€(1980).ñ‘ñÐ ° ÐÐ  ° Ðñ‘ññ–ñ€€ñ–ññ—ññ–ñwñ–ññ—ññ˜ñWe€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€trial€court'sÏassignment€of€costs.ñ˜ññ’ñÌñ’ñà@??,êàV.€€ˆÌòòà  àóóMr.€Humphrey€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€visitation€order,€arguing€thatÐ \-¬(& Ðphysical€visitation€should€have€been€specifically€ordered.€€The€Final€DecreeÏgrants€to€Mr.€Humphrey€ð ðreasonable€visitation€of€the€partiesðð€minor€children.ðð€ÏThere€is€nothing€in€the€record€to€substantiate€Mr.€Humphreyððs€claim€that€thisÏholding€is€in€error€or€that€it€precludes€personal€visits.€€We€are€unable€to€considerÏpost„decree€events€in€assessing€the€validity€of€the€decree.€€Mr.€HumphreyððsÐ 8`30 Ðremedy,€if€he€is€dissatisfied€with€his€former€wifeððs€interpretation€of€orÏcompliance€with€the€order,€lies€in€the€trial€court.òòÐ Ô$ Ѐóóà  àMr.€Humphrey€contends€that€the€trial€court's€failure€to€order€physicalÐ øH Ðvisitation€has€effectively€deprived€him€of€any€contact€with€his€children.€€He€alsoÏargues€that€Ms.€Humphrey€violated€the€trial€court's€visitation€order€€permittingÏhim€twice€weekly€telephone€contact€with€his€children.€Since€these€allegedÏmatters€would€have€occurred€after€entry€of€the€decree,€the€record€contains€noÏindication€that€Mr.€Humphrey€raised€this€issue€in€the€trial€court.€€Therefore,€weÏare€precluded€from€addressing€the€matter.€€Mr.€Humphrey,€however,€€may€stillÏseek€compliance€with€the€visitation€provisions€of€the€divorce€decree€byÏpetitioning€the€trial€court.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Crabtree€v.€Crabtreeóó,€716€S.W.2d€923,€925Ð h Ð(Tenn.€App.€1986).€€ÌÔ‡¼Í»»¼ß)Ôà  àAccordingly,€having€considered€the€entire€record,€we€affirm€the€trialÐ `° Ðcourt's€decision€to€grant€a€divorce€to€Ms.€Humphrey.€€We€reverse€the€trial€court'sÏruling€regarding€the€division€of€property€and€remand€for€further€proceedings€onÏthat€issue€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€Appellee's€motion€to€dismiss€the€appealÏis€denied.€€The€costs€of€this€appeal€shall€be€divided€equally€between€the€parties,Ïfor€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.€€Ìñ™ñÓÓñ™ññšññ™ñÓÓñ™ññšññ™ññ™ññšñÓÓñšñà0  àÐ  T$ T$ ÐÌÌñ›ñà0  àà  àÌñ›ñà  àà ¼ à_____________________________Ìà  àà ¼ àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÌñœñÌÌñœñCONCUR:ÌññÌññÌÌ___________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.ÌÌñžñÌñžñÌ___________________________________ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JUDGEÌÐ ˜9è42 ЇÌÔ#†¼ß)»»¼ÍY#Ôà  àÌà  àÌÐ  à0 ÐÌñ•ñ€Nothing€in€the€record€demonstrates€that€this€issue€was€presented€to€the€trial€court.Ïat€the€same€time€in€conjunction€with€the€€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.01,€heÏwas€entitled€to€thirty€days€after€service€to€respond€to€the€complaint€and€the€ÌÌà  àFurther,€ÌÌMr.€Humphrey€further€argues€that€because€the€trial€court€heard€argument€on€hisÏmotion€for€extension€of€time€during€the€divorce€hearing,€he€was€awaitingÏinformation€and€was€unprepared.€€€Due€process€under€both€the€State€and€federalÏconstitutions€requires€a€hearing€in€a€meaningful€time€and€manner€before€theÏgovernment€may€interfere€with€significant€property€or€liberty€interests.€€òòSeeÐ `°  ÐMemphis€Light,€Gas€&€Water€Div.€v.€Craftóó,€436€U.S.€1,€19,€98€S.Ct.€1554,€1565,Ð pÀ  Ð56€L.ED.2d€30€(1978),€òòsee€Cooper€v.€Williamson€County€Bd.€of€Educ.,óó€803Ð €Ð  ÐS.W.2d€200,€202€(Tenn.€1990);€Our€law€authorizes€divorces€based€conviction€ofÏinfamous€crimes.€€upon€being€convicted€of€€a€felony€and€sentenced€to€confinementÏin€the€penitentiary.€€€€Mr.€Humphrey's€admitted€felony€satisfies€that€criteria.€€Thus,ÏMs.€Humphrey€was€legally€entitled€to€a€divorce.€€Moreover,€the€trial€court€did€notÏadjudicate€the€issues€of€alimony€or€division€of€property€and€the€child€custodyÏcould€not€have€issue,€thus,€on€the€ground€that€€Such€grounds€con€€ground€ofÏinappropriate€marital€conduct.€ÌPrisoners€do€not€forfeit€their€constitutional€rights€in€civil€proceedings€by€virtue€ofÏtheir€conviction€and€incarceration.€òòSeeóó€òòWhisnant€v.€Byrdóó,€525€S.W.2d€152,€153Ð ` Ð(Tenn.€1975)€factual€finding€that€the€parties€had€no€marital€property,€however,Ïappears€to€have€been€premised€on€one„sided€evidence€presented€at€theÏconstitutionally€infirm€hearing€at€issue.€€At€that€hearing,€Mr.€Humphrey€voiced€hisÏconcern€that€the€property€had€not€been€distributed€equitably.€€In€fact,€he€apparentlyÏraised€this€issue€in€sufficient€detail€that€the€trial€court€ordered€Ms.€Humphrey€toÏprovide€him€with€information€on€the€purportedly€fraudulent€sale€of€the€maritalÏresidence.€€But€the€lack€additional€time€or€proper€notice€prevented€Mr.€HumphreyÏfrom€substantiating€his€allegations€with€proof.€ñ•ñ