ÿWPC: …# VU:a %› 0(¡b Én­Õw@‚ 4 Ö Ö 0lå 0DQ 0J• 0Tß 0^3 0h‘ 0rù 0|k 0†ç 0m 1uý 0drU*ÖB)DC) AMlû¹v~´vÓ2 D3 B8 0@U AO•Æä 0Dª D/î B˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 ,†r‰AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡- ù -«<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@ ðñPòEóôPõDöD÷DøÓ€DÒ 3|x((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ñÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌJanuary€17,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò++++'ÿÿdxd d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÒ € ÒÒ ° ÒÒ € ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€GÈXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÞ ÞÌKIMBERLY€ANNE€(CARUTHERS)à à)ÌLOVAN,à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9607„CV„00317ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSumner€CircuitÌÙ€€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|€v` ç `€€@ÿRßà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€14544„CÌMICHAEL€GERALD€LOVAN,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌà@ àCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€SUMNER€COUNTYÌAT€GALLATIN,€TENNESSEE€ÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€GOODALL,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌJOSEPH€Y.€LONGMIRE,€JR.Ì103€Bluegrass€Commons€Blvd.ÌP.€O€Box€738ÌHendersonville,€Tennessee€37077„0738Ìà àAttorney€for€Plaintiff/AppelleeÌÌRONALD€B.€BUCHANANÌ103€Hazel€Path€CourtÌHendersonville,€Tennessee€37075Ìà àAttorney€for€Defendant/AppellantÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€MODIFIED€IN€PART;Ìà@ àAND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌTODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌKOCH,€J.ÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà@ àò òòòÔ€ „ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óóóÔ€ XÔÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€granted€the€wife€an€absolute€divorce,€and€gave€herÏcustody€of€the€two€minor€children.€€The€court€also€divided€the€marital€property,€andÏordered€the€husband€to€pay€child€support€and€rehabilitative€alimony.€€TheÏhusband€appealed,€arguing€that€the€court€erred€in€its€valuation€and€division€of€theÏmarital€property,€and€in€its€support€orders.€€We€modify€the€trial€courtððs€orders€inÏregard€to€alimony€and€child€support.€€In€all€other€respects,€we€affirm€the€trial€court.€ÌÌà@ àò òI.Ìó óÌà àà àMichael€Gerald€Lovan€married€Kimberly€Anne€Caruthers€in€1976.€ÏTwo€children€were€born€of€the€marriage,€a€boy€born€in€1983,€and€a€girl,€born€inÏ1993.€€In€1995,€the€wife€left€the€marital€home,€and€on€August€17€of€that€year,€sheÏfiled€a€complaint€for€divorce€which€alleged€that€the€husband€had€been€guilty€ofÏinappropriate€marital€conduct.€€The€husband€counter„claimed€for€divorce,€on€theÏground€of€irreconcilable€differences€and€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€€€€à à€€€€ÌÌà àà àDuring€a€lengthy€and€hard„fought€trial,€each€party€accused€the€other,Ïamong€other€things,€of€domestic€abuse€and€child€neglect,€and€protested€his€or€herÏown€innocence€of€any€such€conduct.€€Perhaps€the€most€difficult€issue€for€the€courtÏwas€the€question€of€the€proper€guardian€for€the€older€child€(both€parties€agreedÏthat€the€younger€child€should€remain€with€the€mother).€€The€court€finally€grantedÏthe€divorce€to€the€wife€on€the€ground€of€the€husbandððs€inappropriate€maritalÏconduct,€and€gave€her€custody€of€both€children.€€The€only€issues€on€appeal,Ïhowever,€involve€the€financial€aspects€of€the€courtððs€decree.ÌÌà àà àCentral€to€the€courtððs€determinations€on€these€issues€was€€testimonyÏas€to€the€value€of€the€two€companies€in€which€Mr.€Lovan€has€an€ownershipÏinterest,€a€software€company€called€Information€Management€&€Consultants€Inc.,Ïand€an€electrical€parts€company€called€Southern€Electric€Motor€Sales€andÏService€Inc.ÌÌà àà àMr.€Lovan€had€founded€the€software€company€in€1990.€€€InformationÏManagement€&€Consultants€sells€software,€written€or€adapted€by€Mr.€Lovan,€forÏcontrol€of€industrial€processes.€€The€business€has€four€employees€including€Mr.ÏLovan€himself.€€He€testified€that€during€most€of€1995,€he€was€drawing€a€monthlyÏsalary€of€$8,000€from€the€company.€€The€company€was€also€paying€$2,000€aÏmonth€into€a€$2€million€life€insurance€policy€with€a€payout€option€that€wouldÏenable€him€to€retire€at€age€55.€€At€the€time€of€the€divorce,€Mr.€Lovan€ran€hisÏbusiness€from€an€office€in€the€basement€of€the€home€he€was€renting.€€Half€of€theÏ$3,000€monthly€rent€was€paid€by€Mr.€Lovan,€and€half€was€paid€by€his€company.€€ÌÌà àà àA€balance€sheet€submitted€for€the€company€as€of€September€22,Ï1995€showed€total€assets€of€$83,365€and€total€liabilities€of€$23,488,€resulting€inÏan€equity€value€of€$59,877.€€Another€balance€sheet,€prepared€by€Mr.€Paul€Young,Ïa€Certified€Public€Accountant€who€testified€as€Mr.€Lovanððs€expert€witness,€showedÏtotal€assets€of€$129,117,€as€of€September€28,€1995.€€The€difference€in€the€twoÏasset€figures€can€largely€be€traced€to€the€$54,709€value€that€was€attributed€toÏvehicles€listed€as€assets€on€the€later€balance€sheet€but€omitted€from€the€earlierÏone.€€The€additional€assets€were€more€than€balanced€by€additional€liabilities,€soÏthe€balance€sheet€prepared€by€Mr.€Young€showed€total€equity€of€$56,017.€€A€profitÏand€loss€statement€for€the€period€January€1€through€September€28,€1995,Ïshowed€a€net€income€of€$44,363.ÌÌà àà àSouthern€Electric€Motors€was€founded€in€1986.€€According€to€theÏwife,€the€husband€owns€a€one„third€interest€in€that€company.€€According€to€Mr.ÏRichard€Greer,€the€manager€and€co„founder€of€the€company,€Mr.€Lovan€owns€aÏ25%€interest.€The€company€has€ten€employees€and€annual€sales€of€over€$1Ïmillion.€€The€balance€sheet€for€Southern€Sales€and€Service,€dated€December€31,Ï1994,€shows€assets€of€$206,382,€and€liabilities€of€$178,258.€€A€profit€and€lossÏstatement€for€the€year€ended€December€31,€1994€shows€a€net€loss€of€$18,006.ÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Valuing€the€Husbandððs€Business€Interestsó óÌÌà àà àObviously€relying€upon€figures€taken€from€the€balance€sheetsÏmentioned€above,€the€court€found€Information€Management€&€Consultants€toÏhave€a€value€of€$83,366,€and€Southern€Electric€Motor€Sales€to€have€a€value€ofÏ$206,382.€€The€court€divided€the€value€of€Southern€Electric€by€three€to€establishÏan€ownership€interest€of€$68,794€for€the€husband.€€The€court€awarded€theÏhusband€clear€title€to€his€interests€in€both€companies,€and€awarded€the€wife€aÏmoney€judgment€of€$76,000,€representing€half€the€value€of€the€marital€propertyÏcontained€in€the€equity€of€both€businesses.€€The€judgment€was€ordered€to€be€paidÏin€monthly€installments€of€$1,809.52.ÌÌà àà àThe€husband€argues€on€appeal€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€basing€itsÏvaluations€on€the€assets€of€the€two€companies€without€taking€their€liabilities€intoÍaccount.€€We€agree€that€under€the€asset€value€method€of€determining€the€value€ofÏa€corporation,€such€an€omission€would€constitute€a€fundamental€error.€€€ÌÌà àà àHowever€the€asset€value€method€is€not€the€only€method€ofÏdetermining€the€value€of€a€corporation,€nor€does€it€appear€to€be€the€best€methodÏin€this€case.€€Inòò€Blasingame€v.€American€Materials€Inc.óó,€654€S.W.2d€659,€666Ï(Tenn.€1983),€a€case€involving€the€rights€of€a€dissenting€corporate€shareholder,Ïour€Supreme€Court€discussed€three€methods,€the€market€value€method,€the€assetÏvalue€method,€and€the€investment€or€earnings€method.€ÌÌà àà àOf€the€three,€the€market€value€method€appears€to€be€the€least€usefulÏin€this€case,€because€no€evidence€was€presented€of€a€market€for€the€shares€ofÏeither€closely„held€corporation.€€Seeòò€Wallace€v.€Wallace,óó€733€S.W.2d€102,€107Ï(Tenn.€App.€1987).Ì€Ìà àà àThe€asset€value€method€looks€to€the€net€assets€of€the€corporation,Ïand€is€only€of€limited€usefulness€here,€particularly€when€valuing€InformationÏManagement€&€Consultants.€€The€reason€is€that€the€prime€asset€of€the€softwareÏcorporation€appears€to€be€the€energy€and€acumen€of€its€guiding€spirit€„„€that€is,€ofÏMr.€Lovan€himself.€€While€such€an€asset€is€sometimes€included€in€a€balance€sheetÏunder€the€general€term,€ð ðgoodwill,ðð€the€balance€sheets€in€the€record€contain€noÍentry€for€goodwill,€but€only€for€such€tangible€assets€as€accounts€receivable,Ïvehicles,€computers€and€office€furniture.€ÌÌà àà àValuing€Mr.€Lovanððs€company€on€the€basis€of€its€earnings€wouldÏappear€to€be€the€best€way€to€reach€a€valid€result.€€The€earnings€method€ð ðrelates€toÏthe€earning€capacity€of€the€corporation€and€involves€an€attempt€to€predict€its€futureÏincome€based€primarily€on€its€previous€earnings€record.ðð€€654€S.W.2d€at€666.ÌÌà àà àMr.€Lovan€argues€that€while€1995€was€a€good€year€for€his€company,Ïit€may€have€been€an€anomaly,€because€it€followed€two€years€of€very€poor€results.ÏHowever€we€note€that€he€failed€to€supply€the€court€with€records€for€the€previousÏyears,€that€he€is€apparently€anticipating€increasing€success,€in€light€of€hisÏannounced€intention€to€retire€at€age€55,€and€that€as€sole€owner€of€InformationÏManagement€&€Consultants,€he€has€been€able€to€characterize€revenues€thatÏinured€to€his€advantage€as€profits,€salary,€benefits€or€even€expenses,€according€toÏhis€preference.ÌÌà àà àMr.€Young€testified€that€it€would€not€be€unusual€for€a€company€likeÏMr.€Lovanððs€to€have€a€sale€value€of€five€to€six€times€its€annual€earnings.€ÏExtrapolating€the€figures€from€the€1995€profit€and€loss€statement€out€to€twelveÏmonths,€and€then€multiplying€the€annual€profit€by€five€or€six€would€result€in€a€valueÍof€between€$295,000€and€$355,000€for€the€software€company,€which€is€far€moreÏthan€the€trial€court€assigned€to€Mr.€Lovanððs€interest€in€both€companies€together.€€ÌÌà àà àTo€reiterate:€valuing€Information€&€Management€Consultants€€by€theÏnet€asset€method€would€result€in€a€value€of€at€least€$56,017.€€Valuing€it€by€theÏearnings€method€would€result€in€a€value€of€at€least€$295,000.€€Thus€if€the€trialÏcourt€erred€in€the€manner€in€which€it€valued€the€company,€the€error€would€have€toÏbe€considered€harmless€(at€least€in€regard€to€Mr.€Lovanððs€claim),€as€the€total€valueÏit€found€for€Mr.€Lovanððs€interests€in€both€companies€together€is€within€the€rangeÏestablished€by€the€proof€for€Information€Management€&€Consultants€alone.€€For€aÏgood€discussion€of€the€valuation€of€closely€held€corporations€in€the€context€of€aÏdivorce€proceeding,€seeòò€Wallace€v.€Wallace,óó€733€S.W.2d€102€(Tenn.€App.€1987).€ÌÌà@ àò òIII.€€The€Gold€Coinsó óÌÌà àà àThe€most€bizarre€aspect€of€this€case€involved€a€collection€of€goldÏcoins€that€Mr.€Lovan€had€accumulated€during€nineteen€years€of€marriage.€€TheÏpartiesðð€separation€began€when€the€wife€left€in€the€middle€of€the€night.€€When€theÏhusband€realized€that€his€wife€was€gone,€he€looked€in€the€closet€for€the€small€safeÏwhere€the€coins€were€kept,€and€discovered€that€it€was€missing.€€The€husbandÏasked€the€court€to€restore€the€coins€to€him,€and€stated€that€their€value€was€$3,500.€ÍThe€wife€denied€taking€the€coins,€or€knowing€where€they€were,€and€stated€thatÏtheir€value€was€probably€about€$100,000.ÌÌà àà àThe€court€declared€from€the€bench€that€the€wife€would€be€awardedÏthe€coins,€but€in€the€final€decree€they€were€listed,€with€a€value€of€$100,000,€on€theÏhusbandððs€side€of€the€ledger.€€The€husband€argued€on€appeal€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€acting€contrary€to€its€own€decision€from€the€bench,€and€in€overestimatingÏthe€value€of€the€coins,€to€the€husbandððs€detriment.ÌÌà àà àWe€note€however,€that€the€court€speaks€through€its€decrees,€and€thatÏoral€statements€of€the€court€are€not€reviewable€unless€incorporated€into€a€decree.€ÏSee€òòMassachusetts€Mutual€Life€Insurance€Co.€v.€Taylor€Implement€&€Vehicle€Coóó,Ï138€Tenn.€28,€195€S.W.€762€(1917);€òòShelby€v.€Shelbyóó,€696€S.W.2d€360€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1985).€€We€note€also€that€no€itemized€list€of€the€coins€was€submitted€to€theÏcourt,€nor€were€the€coins€appraised.€€Their€valuation€thus€apparently€came€downÏto€a€question€of€the€credibility€of€the€parties.€€Findings€of€a€trial€court€which€areÏbased€upon€the€credibility€of€witnesses€are€normally€afforded€great€deference€byÏthe€reviewing€court.€Seeòò€Town€of€Alamo€v.€Forcum„James,óó€205€Tenn.€478,€327ÏS.W.2d€47€(1959).€€€€€€Ìà@ àÌà àà àWhile€granting€the€coins€to€the€husband€may€prove€to€be€an€emptyÏexercise,€it€places€an€obligation€on€the€wife,€if€she€does€have€them,€to€return€themÍto€the€husband.€€If€she€should€prove€to€be€selling€the€coins€or€knowingly€retainingÏpossession€of€them€in€the€face€of€the€courtððs€order,€she€would€be€guilty€of€bothÏconversion€and€contempt€of€court,€and€would€be€subject€to€whatever€punishmentÏthe€court€chose€to€impose€on€her.€€€Ìà@ àÌà@ à€ò òIV.€€Rehabilitative€Alimonyó óÌÌà àà àThe€court€granted€the€wife€rehabilitative€alimony€of€$1,000€perÏmonth€for€120€months€via€wage€assignment.€€The€proof€showed€that€the€wifeÏworked€as€a€paralegal,€and€had€a€reliable€monthly€net€income€of€$1,766.€€HerÏincome€and€expense€statement€listed€monthly€expenses€of€$6,170,€whichÏincluded€monthly€payments€of€over€$1,000€on€a€1989€Mercedes€automobile.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€clear€that€the€wife€is€entitled€to€alimony€in€light€of€the€relativeÏearning€capacities€of€the€parties,€the€duration€of€the€marriage,€the€wifeððsÏcontributions€to€the€marriage€and€the€relative€fault€of€the€parties.€€See€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€36„5„101.€In€that€same€statute,€our€legislature€has€stated€a€preference€forÏtemporary€rehabilitative€alimony€over€alimony€in€futuro.€€See€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ36„5„101(d)(1).ÌÌà àà àThe€husband€argues€that€the€wife€is€not€an€appropriate€candidate€forÏrehabilitative€alimony€because€she€already€has€a€reliable€source€of€income,€andÍthere€is€not€much€prospect€for€increasing€her€earning€capacity€through€furtherÏeducation€or€training.€€€However,€we€believe€that€the€wife€is€entitled€to€temporaryÏsupport,€while€she€adjusts€her€life€style€to€her€post„divorce€status.€€We€alsoÏbelieve€that€120€months€is€more€time€than€is€necessary€for€that€adjustment.€€WeÏtherefore€modify€the€courtððs€order€by€reducing€the€period€of€support€from€120Ïmonths€to€60€months.€€As€was€stated€in€the€courtððs€decree,€the€obligation€willÏterminate€if€the€wife€should€die€or€remarry,€and€it€is€subject€to€modification€byÏeither€party€should€a€change€of€circumstances€occur.€à àà àÌÌà@ àò òV.€Child€Supportó ó€ÌÌà àà àThe€husband€was€ordered€to€pay€the€wife€$1,783€per€month€for€childÏsupport,€an€amount€based€upon€the€child€support€guidelines€for€a€monthly€incomeÏof€$8,000.€€The€husband€was€also€directed€to€provide€the€wife€with€his€income€taxÏreturns€and€W„2€forms€each€year,€and€to€pay€the€wife€a€sum€equal€to€32%€of€anyÏincome€received€from€his€business€interests€in€excess€of€$96,000€per€year.ÌÌ€€€€à àà àWe€believe€that€the€trial€court€exceeded€its€authority€in€ordering€anÏautomatic€adjustment€in€child€support€based€upon€a€percentage€of€the€husbandððsÏfuture€income€as€determined€by€his€income€tax€return.€€While€the€child€supportÏguidelines€create€a€rebuttable€presumption€as€to€the€correct€amount€of€childÏsupport,€based€upon€the€obligorððs€income,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(2)(A)Íonly€authorizes€the€courts€to€provide€for€the€future€support€of€a€spouse€or€of€theÏchildren€ð ð.€.€.€by€fixing€some€òòdefinite€amountóó€or€amounts€to€be€paid€in€monthly,Ïsemimonthly€or€weekly€installments,€or€otherwise,€as€circumstances€may€warrant€.Ï.€.€.ðð€€(emphasis€added).€ÌÌà àà àSuch€a€definite€obligation€provides€the€dependent€children€with€aÏpredictable€amount€of€support,€and€enables€the€obligor€€to€shoulder€a€knownÏburden.€If€the€obligorððs€income€should€increase€or€decrease€substantially,€thenÏeither€party€may€apply€to€the€court€for€a€modification€of€the€child€supportÏobligation.€€In€view€of€the€existence€of€a€well„established€mechanism€forÏadjustment€of€child€support,€the€courtððs€action,€although€well„intentioned,€amountsÏto€an€extension€of€its€authority€beyond€the€mandate€of€the€legislature.ÌÌà@ àò òVI.ó óÌÌà àà àWe€shorten€the€duration€of€Mr.€Lovanððs€obligation€to€pay€his€formerÏwife€rehabilitative€alimony€from€120€months€to€60€months.€€We€also€modify€theÏchild€support€award€by€eliminating€any€obligation€based€upon€future€income€inÏexcess€of€$96,000€per€year.€€In€all€other€respects€we€affirm€the€trial€court.€€RemandÏthis€cause€ÌÌÌto€the€Circuit€Court€of€Sumner€County€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€thisÏopinion.€€Divide€the€costs€on€appeal€equally€between€the€appellant€and€theÏappellee.€€€ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÓÓ____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌMIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌÇÑ  Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌKIMBERLY€ANNE€(CARUTHERS)à à)ÌLOVAN,à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9607„CV„00317Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSumner€CircuitÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€14544„CÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAffirmed€in€Part;ÌMICHAEL€GERALD€LOVAN,à àà à)à àModified€in€Part;€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àand€RemandedÌà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à)ÌÌà@ àò òòòÔ€ ¼ÔJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€Tó óóóÔ€ XÔÌÌÓÓà àà àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€theÏCircuit€Court€of€Sumner€County,€briefs€and€argument€of€counsel;€uponÏconsideration€whereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt€is€modified€as€to€the€rehabilitative€alimony€and€child€support,€and€in€all€otherÏrespects€affirmed.Ìà àà àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€of€the€Court€filed€herein,€it€is,Ïtherefore,€ordered€and€decreed€by€this€Court€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€beÏmodified€in€part€and€affirmed€in€part.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Circuit€CourtÏof€Sumner€County€for€the€execution€of€the€judgment€and€for€the€collection€of€theÏcosts€accrued€below.Ìà àà àCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€equally€against€Kimberly€AnneÏ(Caruthers)€Lovan€and€Michael€Gerald€Lovan,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.Ìà àà àENTER€_______________________.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà àMIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à