ÿWPC³ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é B)'DCP AM“U*à B #'v~JvÓÈ D3› 0@Î AOÆ] 0D# D/g B–˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- úûDüDýþEÿEÓ€ nnG Ôô-Ô3|x 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌMarch€13,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  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  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€–.XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñ›RALPH€GUEST€œMADDUX›,€III,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àMaury€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€91„440ÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9509„CH„00394ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€#&";+'h|]ß` ç `€€LßSHERYL›€LYNNE€œMADDUX›,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OFÏMAURY€COUNTYÌÌà@ àAT€COLUMBIA,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌà@ àHONORABLE€JIM€T.€HAMILTON,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌBobby€W.€SandsÌRick€C.€œOsborn›ÌSANDS€&€SANDSÌ102€West€Seventh€Street,€Suite€200ÌPost€Office€Box€1660ÌColumbia,€Tennessee€38402„1660ÌœATTORNEYS›€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLEEÌÌÌR.€E.€Lee€DaviesÌœHARTZOG›,€œSILVA›€&€DAVIESÌ123€Fifth€Avenue,€NorthÌP.€O.€Box€664ÌFranklin,€Tennessee€37064ÌATTORNEY€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLANTÌÌÌAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌà àà àà àà àÌCONCUR:ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÇRALPH€GUEST€œMADDUX›,€III,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àMaury€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€91„440ÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9509„CH„00394ÌœSHERYL›€LYNNE€œMADDUX›,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌœà àà àà àà àà àòòO›€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€captioned€defendant„wife,€has€appealed€an€unsatisfactory€decision€of€the€TrialÏCourt€regarding€her€post„divorce€decree€petition€for€increase€in€child€support.€€The€wifeÏpresents€the€following€issues€for€review:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à1.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€deviating€from€the€childÏsupport€guidelines.ÌÌà8 àà8 à2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€award€attorneyððsÏfees€to€Mrs.€œMuehlbauer›€on€behalf€of€the€children.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€November€6,€1991,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€ð ðAgreed€Order€of€Divorceðð€whichÏcontained€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à.€.€.€2.€€Custody€of€œZachry›€Guest€œMaddux›€and€Miranda€œEllison›ÏœMaddux›,€the€minor€children€of€the€parties,€is€awarded€jointly€toÏhusband€and€wife,€with€primary€physical€custody€being€placedÏwith€wife.Ìœà8 àà8 à3.›€€(a)€Husband€shall€be€entitled€to€have€the€children€every€otherÏweekend€from€Friday€afternoon€until€Sunday€afternoon;€everyÏTuesday€afternoon,€or€after€school,€until€Wednesday€morning,Ïwhen€husband€shall€return€the€children€to€school€or€to€wife,€ifÏthere€is€no€school;€and€every€other€Thursday€afternoon,€or€afterÏschool,€(during€the€week€in€which€wife€has€the€children€for€theÏweekend)€until€Friday€morning€when€husband€shall€return€theÏchildren€to€school€or€to€wife,€if€there€is€no€school.€€[It€is€agreedÏthat€so€long€as€the€parties€reside€in€Maury€County€that€theÏchildren€shall€remain€enrolled€in€Columbia€Academy€with€theÏhusband€paying€the€tuition€fees,€unless€both€parties€mutuallyÍagree€to€a€change€of€schools.€„€Initialed€by€œBWS›,€œRELD›,€œSLM›,ÏœRGM›]Ìà8 àà8 à€€€€€€(b)€For€1991,€the€children€will€be€with€wife€onÏThanksgiving€Day€until€4:00€p.m.,€when€husband€will€pickÏthem€up€and€return€them€to€wife€the€following€morning.€€TheÏchildren€will€be€with€wife€for€Christmas€Eve,€except€from€5:00Ïp.m.€until€8:00€p.m.,€when€husband€will€take€them€to€hisÏfamilyððs€Christmas€party.€€On€Christmas€Day,€husband€will€pickÏup€the€children€at€10:00€œa.m.›€and€return€them€to€wife€by€1:00Ïp.m.€€Husband€will€again€pick€up€the€children€at€6:00€p.m.€onÏChristmas€Day€and€return€them€to€wife€the€following€morning.Ìà8 àà8 à€€œ(c)›€Thereafter€the€major€holidays€(Thanksgiving,€Christmas,ÏEaster,€Spring€Break,€and€œ4th›€of€July)€will€be€divided€orÏalternated€between€the€parties€as€they€may€agree.€€Labor€Day€andÏMemorial€Day€will€be€with€the€party€who€has€the€children€on€thatÏweekend.Ìà8 àà8 à4.€€All€other€matters,€including€child€support,€alimony,Ïattorneyððs€fees,€and€division€of€property,€are€reserved€to€beÏlitigated€if€necessary.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€May€1,€1992,€a€ð ðFinal€Decreeðð€was€entered€requiring€parties€to€contribute€equally€toÏmortgage€payments€ð ðline€of€credit€œpayments,ðð›€taxes€and€œinsurance›€on€the€family€home€to€beÏoccupied€by€the€wife€and€children,€and€requiring€the€husband€to€pay€$750.00€per€month€childÏsupport€in€addition€to€tuition.ÌÌà àIn€June,€1994,€the€wife€remarried€and€purchased€the€interest€of€the€husband€in€theÏhome€after€which€the€husband€ceased€contributing€to€mortgage€payments,€taxes€and€insurance.ÌÌà àOn€December€22,€1994,€the€wife€filed€the€present€petition€which€alleged€the€followingÏchanges€of€circumstances:Ìà à1.€€Cessation€of€contributions€to€mortgage€and€line€of€credit€payments,€taxes€andÏinsurance.Ìà à2.€€Child€support€payments€no€longer€conform€to€Child€Support€Guidelines.ÌÌà àThe€order€of€the€Trial€Court€contains€the€following€findings:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€€Mrs.€œMaddux›€was€unemployed€or€between€jobs€at€the€timeÏof€the€divorce€and€is€now€employed€as€a€Guidance€CounselorÏwith€the€Maury€County€Board€of€Education.€€Mr.€œMaddux›Ïremains€a€part€owner€and€employee€of€Columbia€Paint€andÏœWallcover›,€Inc.€€The€evidence€shows€that€his€income€hasÏincreased€slightly€from€the€date€of€the€divorce€fromÏapproximately€$48,000.00€to€$51,000.00€for€the€most€recentÏyear€which€is€about€a€seven€percent€(7%)€increase€since€1991.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.Under€the€applicable€guidelines€on€an€income€ofÏ$51,000.00,€the€court€finds€that€the€plaintiff€would€have€a€childÏsupport€obligation€for€two€(2)€children€of€$987.00€per€month.€.Ï.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€1.€€The€parties€have€joint€legal€custody€of€their€children€withÏMrs.€œMaddux›€as€the€primary€physical€custodian.Ìà8 àà8 à€€2.€€The€husband€has€the€children€in€his€primary€care€for€tenÏ(10)€days€of€each€month€which€is€thirty€percent€(30%)€of€theÏtime.€€The€record€indicates€that€he€has€the€primary€responsibilityÏfor€the€total€care€of€the€children€on€those€days.Ìà8 àà8 à€€3.€€The€record€also€indicates€that€Mr.€œMaddux›€pays€or€isÏresponsible€for€the€childrenððs€tuition€at€private€school€(ColumbiaÏAcademy)€and€also€pays€for€the€childrenððs€lunches€at€school.Ìà8 àà8 à€€4.€€The€Court€finds€that€the€record€establishes€that€Mr.€œMaddux›Ïalso€pays€a€substantial€portion€of€the€childrenððs€incidental€schoolÏexpenses,€one„half€of€all€extracurricular€activities€includingÏdance,€riding€lessons,€summer€camps,€and€one„half€of€allÏbirthday€gifts.€€The€record€also€establishes€that€Mr.€œMaddux›Ïexpends€additional€monies€for€the€childrenððs€clothing€andÏvacations.Ìà8 àà8 à€€5.€€While€Mr.€œMaddux›€does€not€have€insurance€as€a€benefit€ofÏhis€employment,€he€pays€to€Mrs.€œMaddux›€who€through€herÏhusband€has€the€benefit€of€a€group€policy,€Mr.€œMaddux›€pays€theÏcost€of€insurance€directly€to€Mrs.€œMaddux.Ì›Ìà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€œ.Ì›Ìà8 àà8 à€€The€Court€finds€that€upon€the€facts€of€this€case€that€theÏrebuttable€presumption€established€by€the€guidelines€is€overcomeÏand€the€applicable€of€the€guidelines€without€modification€wouldÏbe€inappropriate€in€this€case.€€Upon€a€consideration€of€theÏparticular€factors€of€this€case,€the€Court€rejects€the€contentionÍthat€the€payment€of€a€mortgage€on€a€jointly€owned€residenceÏshould€be€equated€as€child€support€and€the€termination€of€thatÏobligation€by€the€remarriage€of€one€party€and€the€purchase€of€theÏex„spouseððs€interest€does€not€require€an€increase€in€child€supportÏper€œse›.Ìà8 àà8 à€€The€Court€further€finds€that€the€application€of€the€guidelinesÏwould€be€inappropriate€upon€the€facts€of€this€case€consideringÏthe€time„sharing€of€the€parties€and€the€concurrent€cost€associatedÏwith€the€children€while€they€are€within€the€parties€care€which€isÏbeyond€that€contemplated€by€the€guidelines,€plus€the€additionalÏsupport€provided€by€Mr.€œMaddux›€in€the€form€of€private€schoolÏtuition,€school€lunch€money,€extracurricular€activities,Ïcontribution€toward€party€gifts,€clothing€expenses€and€otherÏincidental€expenses.Ìà8 àà8 à€€The€Court€therefore€finds€that€the€original€cash€award€of€childÏsupport€of€$750.00€should€be€increased€to€the€sum€of€$800.00Ïper€month€which€correlates€with€the€increase€in€the€plaintiff,€Mr.ÏœMaddux›ððs,€income.€€The€award€shall€be€retroactive€to€January,Ï1995€and€Mr.€œMaddux›€shall€make€a€lump€sum€payment€ofÏ$300.00€directly€to€the€Mrs.€œMuehlbauer›.ÌÌÌÓÓà àAppellant€first€argues€that€the€Trial€Court€ð ðapparently€found€that€the€facts€.€.€.€didÏjustify€a€modification€of€child€support.ðð€€Based€upon€this€assumption,€appellant€insists€that€theÏTrial€Court€should€have€granted€child€support€in€accordance€with€Child€Support€Guidelines,Ïi.e.€32%€of€the€fatherððs€net€income,€computed€by€deducting€13.02%€from€income€of€selfÏemployed€persons.€€ðð1240„2„4„.03(4)€Child€Support€Guidelines.ÌÌà àThe€original€divorce€decree,€quoted€above,€required€payment€of€tuition€fees€in€anÏunspecified€amount.€€The€present€record€is€silent€on€the€amount€of€such€fees.€€ð ðAll€otherÏmatters,ðð€including€child€support€were€reserved.ÌÌà àThe€ð ðFinal€Decreeðð€incorporated,€and€approved€a€ð ðMarital€Dissolution€Agreement,ððÏwhich€contained€the€following€provisions€regarding€the€home:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€€1.€€The€parties€own,€as€tenants€by€the€entirety,€a€house€and€lotÏlocated€at€905€Hillcrest€Avenue€in€Columbia,€Tennessee.€€TheÍparties€shall€remain€equal€tenants€in€common€in€said€home;Ïhowever,€wife€shall€continue€to€reside€in€said€home€with€theÏpartiesðð€two€children€until€she€remarries,€dies,€moves,€or€theÏyoungest€child€turns€18€(whichever€event€first€occurs).€€TheÏparties€acknowledge€that€the€outside€of€said€house€needs€to€beÏpainted,€the€roof€needs€to€be€replaced,€water€damage€from€priorÏleaks€needs€to€be€repaired,€and€new€carpet€needs€to€be€installed.€ÏThe€parties€shall€apply€for€a€home€equity€line€of€credit€in€order€toÏmake€these€repairs.€€Each€party€shall€be€responsible€for€one„halfÏof€the€existing€mortgage€œpayment,›€taxes€and€insurance,€and€one„half€of€the€payment€on€the€line€of€credit.€€Wife€shall€beÏresponsible€for€general€maintenance€and€upkeep€of€the€inside€ofÏsaid€house€while€she€is€living€there.€€If€any€other€major€repairsÏneed€to€be€made€during€the€time€wife€is€residing€in€said€home,Ïthen€the€parties€may€agree€to€draw€on€the€equity€line€of€credit.€€IfÏthe€parties€cannot€agree,€then€either€party€may€petition€the€courtÏregarding€the€necessity€of€making€such€a€repair.€€Upon€the€saleÏof€said€home,€the€net€proceeds€shall€be€divided€equally€betweenÏthe€parties.€€ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€same€decree€contained€the€following€provisions€for€child€support:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àœ€€4.€€Beginning€May€1,€1992,€and€on€the€1st€day€of€each€monthÏthereafter,€husband€shall€pay€to€wife€child€support€in€the€amountÏof€$750€per€month€for€the€support€and€maintenance€of€theÏpartiesðð€two€minor€children.€€As€additional€child€support,Ïhusband€shall€be€responsible€for€paying€for€the€childrenððsÏlunches€at€school,€one„half€of€the€summer€day„care,€and€one„half€of€the€extended€day„care€during€school.€.€.€.€Said€childÏsupport€payments€(including€husbandððs€contribution€to€theÏhousing€costs€of€the€family)€are€in€compliance€with€theÏTennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€based€upon€husbandððsÏincome€from€his€interest€in€Columbia€Paint€&€Wallcover.€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€12.€€Husband€shall€be€responsible€for€providing€healthÏinsurance€coverage€for€the€partiesðð€minor€children.€€If€wife€isÏable€to€obtain€health€insurance€coverage€through€herÏemployment,€then€husband€shall€have€the€option€of€paying€wifeÏan€amount€equal€to€what€wifeððs€employer€deducts€from€herÏsalary€for€family€coverage€for€the€two€children.€€The€parties€shallÏbe€equally€responsible€for€all€medical€and€dental€bills€of€theÏminor€children€not€covered€by€insurance,€including€theÏdeductible.›ÌÌÌÓÓà àð ðSaid€child€support€paymentsðð€may€be€strictly€limited€to€the€payments€mentioned€inÏparagraph€4,€i.e.,€$750.00€per€month,€lunches€at€school,€summer€day€care,€extended€day€careÏand€ð ðcontribution€to€housing€costs.ðð€€It€would€be€more€reasonable€to€include€health€care€costsÏdescribed€in€paragraph€12.€€In€any€event,€$750.00€is€the€only€specific€amount€of€child€supportÏmentioned.€€Other€items€are€not€quantified€in€the€agreement€or€the€evidence,€except€thatÏð ðextended€day€care€contributionðð€is€$15.00€per€month.ÌÌà àUnquestionably,€the€occupancy€of€the€family€residence€by€the€mother€and€children€was,Ïto€some€degree,€child€support.€€However,€it€is€not€quantified€in€this€record€in€terms€of€rentalÏvalue.€€Contribution€to€mortgage€was€$375.00€per€month,€but€the€amount€of€repairs,€insuranceÏand€taxes€are€not€mentioned€in€the€agreement€or€the€record.€€There€is€no€indication€of€what€œpart›Ïœof€the›€various€home€expenses€were€attributable€to€child€support€and€what€œpart€›€were€attributableÏto€preservation€and€increase€of€the€husbandððs€equity€in€the€home.ÌÌà àIt€must€be€conceded€that€the€contributions€to€expenses€of€the€residence€had€a€content€ofÏchild€support€even€though€its€amount€cannot€be€ascertained.€€œAlso,›€the€joint€custody€andÏextensive€visitation€with€the€father,€even€though€not€evaluated,€was€a€factor€in€the€amount€ofÏthe€$750.00€monthly€œpayment›€agreed€upon€by€the€parties.€€The€reference€to€compliance€withÏthe€guidelines€is€not€deemed€to€be€a€stipulation€that€the€various€contributions€totaled€the€exactÏamount€of€support€required€by€the€guidelines.€€Its€import€is€that€the€provisions€òòsatisfiedóó€theÏguidelines,€or€were€not€less€than€the€guidelines.€€€The€agreement€does€not€establish€that€the€totalÏcontributions€were€exactly€the€amount€required€by€the€guidelines,€or€that€the€termination€of€oneÏor€more€contributions€would€require€additional€award€of€support.ÌÌà àThe€increase€in€earnings€of€the€father€is€sufficient€to€justify€an€increase€in€child€support.€Ïðð1240„2„4.02€„€Child€Support€Guidelines.ÌÌà àAppellantððs€argument€appears€to€be€based€upon€a€theory€that€where€parties€agree€to€aÏcombination€of€several€forms€of€support€as€sufficient€under€the€guidelines,€the€discontinuanceÏof€one€of€the€forms€of€support€must€be€followed€by€the€substitution€of€another€form€of€supportÏof€equal€value.€€This€Court€does€not€agree.€€Where€a€Court€is€called€upon€to€set€a€new€rate€ofÏchild€support,€it€is€not€bound€by€previous€agreements€of€the€parties€or€its€previous€orders.ÌÌà àMoreover,€upon€determination€of€changes€of€circumstances,€the€Trial€Court€is€notÏbound€to€grant€an€increase€in€the€exact€amount€indicated€by€a€single€change€of€circumstance,Ïbut€from€a€re„examination€of€all€relevant€circumstances.€€From€such€examination,€the€TrialÏCourt€determined€that€ð ðthe€application€of€the€guidelines€would€be€inappropriateðð€due€to€factorsÏenumerated€in€the€judgment.ÌÌà àUpon€review€of€this€judgment€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record,€œT.R.A.P.›€Rule€œ13d›,€this€CourtÏfinds€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€of€the€Trial€Court€uponÏwhich€he€determined€that€the€strict€application€of€the€guidelines€was€œinappropriate,€and€theÏamount€of€increase€in€child€support.›ÌÌà àAppellant€complains€of€the€failure€of€the€Trial€Court€to€award€attorneyððs€fees€to€her.€ÏChildren€are€entitled€to€have€their€father€pay€reasonable€counsel€fees€incurred€in€their€behalf,€onÏpetition€by€the€mother€to€require€the€father€to€contribute€to€their€support€and€maintenance.€ÏòòDalton€v.€Dalton,€óóTenn.€App.€1993,€858€œS.W.2d›€324;€òòGraham€v.€Graham,€óó140€Tenn.€328,Í204€œS.W.›€987€(1918).€€However,€the€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€in€divorce€cases€rests€in€theÏsound€discretion€of€the€Trial€Court.€€òòKoch€v.€Koch,€óóTenn.€App.€1993,€874€œS.W.2d›€571;ÏòòœMcCarty›€v.€œMcCarty›,€óóTenn.€App.€1992;€863€œS.W.2d›€716,€under€the€circumstances€of€theÏpresent€case,€the€Trial€Court€did€not€err€in€failing€to€award€attorneyððs€fees.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€against€theÏappellant.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€for€any€necessary€further€proceedings.ÌÌà àAffirmed€and€Remanded.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGE