ÿWPC- …# VUNa %¯ 0 Nµ 0Í bÐ w@Ø 4 , 0D; 2 †± 0J7 N ƒ m… 0Tœ 0^ð 0hN 0r¶ 0|( 0†¤ 0* 1uº 0d/ B“U>° D3îB)!DCJ 0@ AMÍU*2DˆvŸþ°¥MU6ò<(«d v~$vÓ% AO`+Ư+ 0Du, D/¹, Bè,˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0nLHÎ'í€"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular¼(&öy$¡¡Ó  ÓÙñÓ Ù(}(2~$¤¤Ý ƒöy!ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€X¡X¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù- DDEÓ€#DÒ 3|x#(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóGoodeMcAllisterMcAllister v. Goode - Opinion Í  ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ2" 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 d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman$$$$'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-,Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial (Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌSeptember€17,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ~Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Stateððs€petition€does€not€specifically€explain€the€basis€of€its€standing€to€seek€Ms.ÏÔ_ÔMcAllisterÔ_Ôððs€child€support;€however,€state€and€federal€law€require€custodial€parents€of€childrenÏreceiving€public€support€to€assign€their€rights€to€support€from€third„parties€to€the€State.€€See€42ÏU.S.C.€ðð€602(a)(26)€(1988);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€71„3„124€(Supp.€1996).€Ì •Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(h)€(1996)€now€requires€marital€dissolution€agreementsÏto€ð ðaffirmatively€acknowledge€that€no€action€by€the€parties€will€be€effective€to€reduce€childÏsupport€after€the€due€date€of€each€payment,€and€that€they€understand€that€court€approval€mustÏbe€obtained€before€child€support€can€be€reduced,€unless€such€payments€are€automaticallyÏreduced€or€terminated€under€the€terms€of€the€agreement.ððÌ ¦Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAt€the€time,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€provided,€in€part,€that:ÌÌà8 àAny€such€modification€of€an€allowance€shall€be€made€retroactively€only€upon€aÏspecific€finding€that€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€was€unable€to€pay€the€full€amount€of€suchÏallowance€through€no€intentional€fault€of€his€or€her€own€and€that€the€facts€of€theÏcase€require€such€a€modification€retroactively€in€order€to€meet€the€ends€ofÏjustice.€Ì ›Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€ð ðlaw€of€the€landðð€clause€in€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€8€is€synonymous€with€the€DueÏProcess€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment.€€òòRiggs€v.€Ô_ÔBursonÔ_Ô,óó€941€S.W.2d€44,€51€(Tenn.Ï1997);€òòState€v.€Trusty,óó€919€S.W.2d€305,€309€(Tenn.€1996);€òòÔ_ÔHarbisonÔ_Ô€v.€Knoxville€Iron€Co.,óóÏ103€Tenn.€421,€431,€53€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€955,€957€(1899).Ì< Œ 9p`(Courier New 2Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô$250/week€ð'ðÔ€5Ô€4.3/weeks/month€=€$1,075/month.Ì ¡Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€calculation€concerning€whether€a€significant€deviation€exists€must€be€based€on€theÏamount€of€the€previously€ordered€support€and€the€amount€currently€required€by€the€guidelines.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòHannah€v.€Ô_ÔLippsÔ_Ô,óó€App.€No.€03A01„9504„CV„00114,€1996€WL€10234,€at€*1€n.1€(Tenn.ÏCt.€App.€Jan.€11,€1996)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€The€difference€betweenÏMr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ôððs€current€child€support€and€the€amount€of€support€required€by€the€guidelines€isÏ$140,€and€this€amount€deviates€from€the€amount€of€support€required€by€the€guidelines€byÏ14.97%.€€When€rounded€to€next€full€percent,€the€amount€of€deviation€is€15%.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(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€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€)ÔÔ€)¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ Ü ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€Do¼¼d dÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñ›Þ ÞÌÌà@ àÔ€)„Ôò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€.0,A1-j|^@` ç `€€@ÿRß›à@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÔ€)¼ÔÌÌó óSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€ex€rel.,à à)ÌSHERRY€Ô_ÔMcALLISTERÔ_Ô,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSumner€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€3846„CÌVS.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 à01A01„9510„CV„00452ÌDANNY€Ô_ÔGOODEÔ_Ô,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€SUMNER€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€Ô_ÔGALLATINÔ_Ô,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€Ô_ÔGOODALLÔ_Ô,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€theÏDefendant/Appellantóó:ÌÌJohn€Knox€Ô_ÔWalkupÔ_Ôà àà àà àà àà àAnita€M.€HoldenÌAttorney€General€and€Reporterà àà àà àà àLebanon,€TennesseeÌÌJames€H.€Tucker,€Jr.ÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àÔ€)„Ôò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€IN€PARTÌà@ àAND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÔ€)¼ÔÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,ÏJUDGEÇÑ ° ÑӀӜԀ)„ÔÌ›à@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÔ€)¼ÔÌà àThis€appeal€involves€a€non„custodial€parentððs€liability€for€a€sizeableÏchild€support€arrearage€accumulated€over€eight€years.€€The€State€of€TennesseeÏpetitioned€the€Circuit€Court€for€Sumner€County€to€require€the€non„custodialÏparent€to€pay€the€arrearage€and€to€œfind›€the€non„custodial€parent€in€contempt.€ÏThe€non„custodial€parent€responded€by€requesting€a€reduction€in€his€childÏsupport€obligation€and€by€asserting€that€he€was€not€in€arrears€because€of€a€sideÏagreement€with€the€custodial€parent€to€reduce€his€child€support€obligation.€ÏThe€trial€court€declined€to€give€effect€to€the€side€agreement€or€to€reduce€theÏnon„custodial€parentððs€child€support€obligation.€€It€determined€that€the€non„custodial€parent€was€in€willful€civil€contempt€and€ordered€him€to€pay€theÏ$42,700€arrearage€to€the€custodial€parent.€€The€non„custodial€parent€takesÏissue€on€this€appeal€with€the€conclusions€that€he€owed€$42,700€in€childÏsupport,€that€he€was€not€entitled€to€a€prospective€reduction€in€his€child€supportÏobligation,€and€that€he€was€in€willful€civil€contempt.€€We€have€determined€thatÏthe€judgment€for€the€arrearage€should€be€affirmed€but€that€the€judgment€forÏcontempt€should€be€reversed€and€that€the€case€should€be€remanded€for€theÏcomputation€of€the€non„custodial€parentððs€prospective€child€support€obligation.ÌÌà@ àò òI.ó óÌÌà àSherry€McAllister€(formerly€Goode)€and€Danny€Goode€married€inÏOctober€1979.€€Their€marriage€foundered€six€years€later.€€They€negotiated€theÏfirst€of€two€property€settlement€agreements€in€June€1986€in€which€Mr.€GoodeÏagreed€to€give€custody€of€the€partiesðð€three€children€to€Ms.€McAllister€and€toÍpay€$250€per€week€in€child€support.€€On€October€21,€1986,€the€Circuit€CourtÏfor€Sumner€County€entered€œa›€final€divorce€decree€incorporating€the€partiesððÏagreements.€€Even€though€the€decree€directed€Mr.€Goode€to€pay€$250€perÏweek€in€child€support,€Ms.€McAllister€signed€a€notarized€document€in€OctoberÏ27,€1986,€stating:ÌÓӜ̛à8 àà8 àI,€Sherry€Goode€have€reduced€the€payment€of€ChildÏsupport,€from€Danny€œGoode,›€to€150.00€œdollars€per›Ïweek,€as€apposed€[sic]€to€the€250.00€per€week,€he€hasÏbeen€paying.€€This€is€in€effect€beginning€October€25,Ï1985.ÌÓ€ÓÌNeither€party€sought€to€modify€the€final€divorce€decree€to€reflect€thisÏagreement.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€simply€began€paying€Ms.€Ô_ÔMcAllisterÔ_Ô€$150,€instead€ofÏ$250,€per€week.€ÌÌà àIn€August€1994€the€State€of€Tennessee,€on€Ms.€Ô_ÔMcAllisterÔ_Ôððs€relation,Ô_Ô× ƒ1 ××  ×Ô_ÔÏsought€to€hold€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€in€contempt€for€failing€to€pay€the€$250€per€weekÏchild€support€required€by€the€October€1986€order.€€The€trial€court€conductedÏa€hearing€in€October€1994€and€directed€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€to€continue€paying€$150Ïper€week€in€child€support€pending€another€hearing.€€Following€a€DecemberÏ1994€hearing,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€in€January€1995,€finding€thatÏMr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€owed€$42,700€in€past€due€child€support€and€directing€him€to€payÏ$250€per€week€in€child€support€and€$50€per€week€toward€the€arrearage.€€TheÏtrial€court€declined€to€consider€reducing€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ôððs€child€support€because€heÏhad€not€filed€a€petition€seeking€a€reduction.ÌÌà àIn€February€1995,€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€petitioned€for€a€reduction€in€childÏsupport.€€Following€a€hearing€in€July€1995,€the€trial€court€denied€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_ÔððsÏpetition€to€reduce€his€child€support,€reaffirmed€its€earlier€order€directing€himÏto€pay€$250€per€week€in€child€support,€and€increased€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ôððs€arrearageÏpayment€to€$100€per€week.€€As€a€result€of€this€decision,€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_ÔððsÏpayments€for€child€support€and€the€arrearage,€including€the€trial€court€clerkððsÏfive€percent€commission,€amounted€to€$367.50€per€week.€€The€trial€courtÏdenied€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ôððs€post„trial€motion€on€September€6,€1995.€€It€also€modifiedÏits€January€1995€order€to€find€specifically€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€was€in€ð ðwillful€civilÏcontemptðð€for€failing€to€pay€child€support€but€declined€to€incarcerate€Mr.ÏÔ_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô.̛̜Ìà@ àò òII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Effect€of€the€October€27,€1986€Agreementó óóóÌÌà àMr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€first€asserts€that€the€trial€court€should€have€excused€hisÏfailure€to€pay€$250€per€week€in€child€support€from€October€1986€throughÏAugust€1994€because€Ms.€McAllister€had€agreed€to€accept€$150€in€weeklyÏchild€support€rather€than€the€$250€per€week€ordered€by€the€trial€court.€€ThisÏagreement€is€not€legally€enforceable€because€parties€cannot€alter€or€amend€aÏchild€support€order€by€private€agreement€once€it€has€been€entered.€€òòConner€v.ÏParrishóó,€No.€89„282„II,€1990€WL€7461,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Feb.€2,€1990)Ï(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€filed);€òòRasnic€v.€Wynnóó,€625€S.W.2d€278,€281€(Tenn.ÍCt.€App.€1981).× ƒ2 ××  ×€€Accordingly,€the€agreement€can€only€affect€Mr.€GoodeððsÏcourt„ordered€child€support€obligation€if€it€supplies€the€basis€for€a€recognizedÏequitable€defense€to€the€demand€for€back€child€support.ÌÌà àEquitable€defenses€that€would€have€the€effect€of€retroactively€modifyingÏa€child€support€obligation€are€no€longer€available€in€cases€such€as€this€oneÏbecause€of€the€œTennessee›€Supreme€Courtððs€construction€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ36„5„101(a)(5).€€òòRutledge€v.€Barrett,óó€802€S.W.2d€604,€607€(Tenn.€1991);€òòseeÏalsoóó€òòBrown€v.€Heggie,óó€876€S.W.2d€98,€101€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€WhileÏrefusing€to€permit€Mr.€Goode€to€raise€equitable€defenses€may€seem€harsh,€theÏGeneral€Assembly€and€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€have€decided€that€theÏaggregate€public€good€derived€from€requiring€all€obligor€parents€to€complyÏfully€with€lawful€child€support€orders€outweighs€the€seeming€harsh€results€inÏany€particular€case.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€correctly€declined€toÏrecognize€the€October€27,€1986€agreement€as€a€basis€for€excusing€Mr.€GoodeÏfrom€his€child€support€obligation.€ÌœÌÌ›Ìà@ àò òIII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Constitutionality€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(óóa)(5)ó óÌÌà à€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(5),€as€construed€by€the€TennesseeÏSupreme€Court,€clearly€undermines€Mr.€Goodeððs€efforts€to€avoid€paying€theÍ$42,700€child€support€arrearage.€€Accordingly,€he€asserts€that€the€statute€isÏunconstitutional€because€it€retroactively€impairs€œboth€his›€contractualÏagreement€with€Ms.€McAllister€and€his€ability€to€request€a€retroactiveÏmodification€of€his€child€support€obligation.€€We€have€determined€that€Mr.ÏGoode€has€no€constitutionally€protected€interest€in€his€agreement€with€Ms.ÏMcAllister€or€in€his€unexercised€opportunity€to€seek€a€retroactive€modificationÏof€his€child€support.ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àThe€authority€of€the€courts€to€make€retroactive€changes€in€a€non„custodial€parentððs€child€support€obligation€changed€approximately€five€monthsÏafter€the€entry€of€Mr.€Goodeððs€and€Ms.€McAllisterððs€final€divorce€decree.€€AtÏthe€time€of€the€negotiation€of€the€partiesðð€property€settlement€agreements€andÏthe€entry€of€the€divorce€decree,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€(Supp.Ï1986)€(amended€1987)€permitted€trial€courts€œto€make›€retroactiveÏmodifications€in€child€support€in€certain€limited€circumstances.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Accordingly,Ïit€was€generally€understood€at€that€time€that€obligor€parents€could€assertÏequitable€defenses€to€claims€for€past€due€child€support.€€òòSeeóó€òòSmith€v.€Smith,Ïóó643€S.W.2d€320,€œ323›€(Tenn.€1982);€òòNissen€v.€Miller,óó€642€S.W.2d€428,€œ430„31›Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1982).ÌÌà àDuring€its€1987€session,€the€General€Assembly€removed€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)ððs€retroactive€modification€feature€in€order€to€avoidÏlosing€millions€of€dollars€in€federal€welfare€funds.€€Act€of€March€27,€1987,Ïch.€39,€ðð€1,€1987€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€47;€òòRutledge€v.€Barrett,óó€802€S.W.2d€at€606.€ÏAs€a€result€of€this€amendment,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(5)€specificallyÏprovides€that€a€child€support€judgment€ð ðshall€not€be€subject€to€modification€asÏto€any€time€period€or€any€amounts€due€prior€to€the€date€that€an€action€forÏmodification€is€filed€and€notice€of€the€action€has€been€mailed€to€the€last€knownÏaddress€of€the€opposing€parties.ðð€€ÌÌà@ àò òB.Ìà@ àòòViolation€of€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€20óóó óÌÌà àOur€consideration€of€Mr.€Goodeððs€attack€on€the€constitutionality€of€theÏ1987€amendment€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€must€be€guided€by€theÏrecognition€that€the€General€Assembly€has€complete€control€over€judicialÏremedies€subject€only€to€the€limitations€in€the€state€and€federal€constitutions.€ÏòòAlamo€Dev.€Corp.€v.€Thomas,€óó186€Tenn.€631,€640,€212€S.W.2d€606,€610Ï(1948);€òòPacific€Eastern€Corp.€v.€Gulf€Life€Holding€Co.,óó€902€S.W.2d€946,€955Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€One€of€these€constitutional€limitations€can€be€found€inÏTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€20€which€states€ð ð[t]hat€no€retrospective€law,€or€lawÏimpairing€the€obligations€of€contracts,€shall€be€made.ðð€€Rather€thanÏproscribing€all€retrospective€laws,€this€provision€proscribes€legislation€thatÏimpairs€contractual€or€vested€legal€rights.€€òòDark€Tobacco€Growersðð€Co„op.ÏAssððn€v.€Dunn,óó€œ150›€Tenn.€614,€632,€266€S.W.€308,€œ312›€(1924);€òòShields€v.ÏœClifton›€Hill€Land€Co.,óó€94€Tenn.€123,€148,€28€S.W.€668,€œ674›€(1894).€€Thus,€toÍbe€successful€with€his€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€20€claim,€Mr.€Goode€mustÏdemonstrate€that€he€possesses€an€actual€contract€right€or€a€vested€legal€right.ÌÌà@ àòòò òImpairment€of€Contractó óóóÌÌà àWe€consider€first€whether€Mr.€Goode€has€demonstrated€that€the€1987Ïamendment€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€interferes€with€a€contractÏright.€€In€order€to€be€protected€by€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€20,€a€contract€rightÏmust€be€legally€enforceable€and€must€not€conflict€with€the€constitution,€theÏstatutes,€or€the€common€law.€€òòSpiegel€v.€Thomas,€Mann€&€Smith,€P.C.óó,€811ÏS.W.2d€528,€530€(Tenn.€1991);€òòLazenby€v.€Universal€Underwriters€Ins.€Co.óó,Ï214€Tenn.€639,€648,€383€S.W.2d€1,€5€(1964)€(recognizing€that€contracts€thatÏconflict€with€constitutions,€statutes,€or€the€common€law€violate€public€policyÏand€are€unenforceable).€€œThe€October€27,€1986€agreement€signed€by€Ms.ÏMcAllister€contravened€positive€law€when€it€was€signed€because,€even€then,Ïthe€parties€did€not€have€the€authority€to€alter€the€trial€courtððs€child€supportÏdecree€by€private€agreement.òò€€Conner€v.€Parrish,óó€òòsupraóó,€1990€WL€7461,€at€*2;ÏòòRasnic€v.€Wynn,óó€925€S.W.2d€at€281.€€Accordingly,€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€never€had€anÏenforceable€contractual€right€entitled€to€constitutional€protection.ÌÌà@ àòòò òImpairment€of€a€Vested€Rightó óóóÌÌà àMr.€Goode€also€asserts€that€the€1987€amendment€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ36„5„101(a)(1)€interfered€with€his€vested€legal€right€to€seek€a€retroactiveÏmodification€of€his€child€support€obligation.€€Retroactive€modifications€ofÏchild€support€obligations€were€not€commonplace€prior€to€1987.€€ObligorÏparents€could€obtain€a€retroactive€modification€only€by€demonstrating€thatÍthey€were€unable€to€pay€the€court„ordered€child€support€through€no€fault€ofÏtheir€own€and€that€granting€them€retroactive€relief€was€required€to€meet€theÏends€of€justice.€€Since€Mr.€Goode€had€not€requested€a€modification€of€his€childÏsupport€before€the€enactment€of€the€1987€amendment€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ36„5„101(a)(1),€he€had,€at€most,€only€an€expectation€that€he€could€seek€aÏretroactive€modification€if€circumstances€ever€warranted€it.ÌÌà àThe€right€Mr.€Goode€now€claims€is€a€remedial€one.€€A€remedial€rightÏcannot€be€considered€vested€unless€it€is€something€more€than€an€expectationÏbased€on€the€anticipated€continuation€of€the€present€law.€€òòLandgraf€v.€USIÏFilm€Prods.,óó€511€U.S.€244,€269,€114€S.€Ct.€1483,€1499€(1994)€(holding€that€aÏstatute€is€not€retrospective€simply€because€it€upsets€expectations€based€on€priorÏlaw);€òòStratton€Claimants€v.€Morris€Claimants,óó€89€Tenn.€497,€516„17,€15€S.W.Ï87,€91€(1891);€2€Thomas€M.€Cooley,€òòA€Treatise€on€Constitutional€LimitationsóóÏ749€(8th€ed.€1927).€€Thus,€for€the€purpose€of€constitutional€analysis,€theÏTennessee€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€a€remedial€right€becomes€vested€onlyÏwhen€a€party€files€a€complaint€or€petition€seeking€to€invoke€it.€€òòDupuis€v.ÏHand,€óó814€S.W.2d€340,€343€(Tenn.€1991)€(holding€that€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ððÏ20€prohibits€retroactively€applying€a€statute€to€previously„filed€cases);€òòMorrisÏv.€Gross,óó€572€S.W.2d€902,€905„07€(Tenn.€1978).€€Ìà àWhen€the€final€divorce€decree€was€entered€in€1986,€Mr.€Goode€had€onlyÏan€expectation€that€he€would€be€able€to€seek€retroactive€modifications€in€hisÏchild€support€if€the€need€arose.€€Since€he€did€not€seek€such€a€modificationÏprior€to€1987,€his€expectation€never€ripened€into€a€vested€right€prior€to€theÏ1987€amendment€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1).€€The€courts€hadÏalready€been€divested€of€authority€to€modify€child€support€ordersÏretroactively€by€the€time€Mr.€Goode€filed€his€petition€in€February€1995.€ÍThus,€as€applied€to€Mr.€Goodeððs€1995€petition,€the€1987€amendment€of€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€did€not€have€a€prohibited€retrospective€effect.ÌÌà@ àò òC.ó óÌà@ àòòò òViolation€of€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€8ó óóóÌÌà àMr.€Goodeððs€final€constitutional€challenge€to€the€1987€amendment€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1)€is€based€on€the€Law€of€the€Land€Clause€ofÏTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€8€that€protects€fundamental€property€and€libertyÏinterests€from€abridgment€under€the€color€of€state€law.€€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ððÏ8,€like€its€counterpart€in€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€the€United€StatesÏConstitution,× ƒ4 ××  ×€does€not€protect€ð ðunilateral€expectationsðð€or€ð ðabstract€needs€orÏdesires.ðð€€òòBoard€of€Regents€v.€Roth,óó€408€U.S.€564,€577,€92€S.€Ct.€2701,€2709Ï(1972).€€Rather,€it€protects€vested€rights,€òòOfficer€v.€Young,óó€13€Tenn.€(5€Yer.)Ï320,€322„23€(1833),€that€are€created€and€defined€by€existing€rules€andÏunderstandings€that€stem€from€an€independent€source€such€as€state€law.€€òòMid„South€Indoor€Horse€Racing,€Inc.€v.€Tennessee€State€Racing€Commððn,óó€798ÏS.W.2d€531,€540€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€ÌÌà àSince€Mr.€Goode€did€not€file€a€petition€seeking€a€retroactiveÏmodification€of€his€child€support€before€the€1987€amendment€to€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1),€he€never€acquired€a€vested€right€to€seek€this€remedy.€ÏBy€the€time€he€filed€a€petition€to€modify€his€child€support€obligation,€theÏopportunity€to€obtain€retroactive€relief€had€been€extinguished€for€eight€years.€ÍAccordingly,€declining€to€permit€Mr.€Goode€to€benefit€in€1995€from€aÏprovision€that€had€been€repealed€since€1987€was€not€contrary€to€Tenn.€Const.Ïart.€I,€ðð€8.€€ÌÌà@ àò òIV.ó óÌà@ àòòò òProspective€Reduction€of€Mr.€Goodeððs€Child€Supportó óóóÌÌà àMr.€Goode€also€takes€issue€with€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€request€forÏa€prospective€modification€of€his€child€support€obligation.€€TheÏuncontroverted€evidence€shows€that€at€the€time€of€the€July€1995€hearing,€Mr.ÏGoode€was€earning€a€gross€income€of€approximately€$3,000€per€month€as€aÏtruck€driver€for€Averitt€Express€in€Nashville.€€The€current€child€supportÏguidelines€require€obligor€parents€with€three€children€to€pay€forty„one€percentÏof€the€ð ðnet€incomeðð€as€defined€in€the€guidelines€for€child€support.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.ÏComp.€R.€&€Regs.€r.€1240„2„4„.03(5)€(1994).€The€net€monthly€income€of€aÏperson€earning€$3,000€per€month€is€$2,280.96,€and€thus€an€obligor€parentððsÏchild€support€obligation€for€three€children€is€$935€per€month.€€This€amount€isÏless€than€Mr.€Goodeððs€current€child€support€obligation€of€$1,075€per€month.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€ÌÌà àThe€mere€fact€that€Mr.€Goodeððs€current€child€support€exceeds€theÏamount€of€support€required€by€the€guidelines€does€not€necessarily€mean€thatÏthe€trial€court€should€have€lowered€Mr.€Goodeððs€monthly€child€supportÏpayments.€€Trial€courts€are€required€to€modify€child€support€obligations€onlyÏwhen€there€is€a€ð ðsignificant€varianceðð€between€the€amount€of€support€requiredÏby€the€guidelines€and€the€amount€currently€ordered.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(1).€€When€the€child€support€obligation€exceeds€$100€per€month,€theÍguidelines€define€a€ð ðsignificant€varianceðð€as€one€of€at€least€fifteen€percent.€€òòSeeóóÏTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€r.€1240„2„4„.02(3).ÌÌà àMr.€Goodeððs€current€$1,075€per€month€child€support€obligation€isÏfifteen€percent€higher€than€the€amount€he€is€required€to€pay€under€the€currentÏchild€support€guidelines.× ƒ7 ××  ×€€He€is,€therefore,€entitled€to€a€prospective€reductionÏin€his€child€support€unless€the€current€variance€is€the€result€of€Mr.€GoodeððsÏvoluntary€€unemployment€or€underemployment€or€is€due€to€a€previousÏdecision€to€deviate€from€the€guidelines.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€r.€1240„2„4„.02(3).€€The€record€contains€no€evidence€that€Mr.€Goode€is€purposelyÏunderemployed€or€that€the€trial€court€ever€made€specific€findings€that€Mr.ÏGoodeððs€child€support€should€not€be€consistent€with€the€amount€required€byÏthe€guidelines.€€Accordingly,€on€remand€the€trial€court€should€either€set€Mr.ÏGoodeððs€child€support€in€accordance€with€the€guidelines€or€set€out€specificallyÏin€writing€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(e)(1)€the€reasons€why€theÏapplication€of€the€guidelines€would€be€unjust€or€inappropriate€in€this€case.ÌÌà@ àò òV.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Calculation€of€the€Arrearageó óóóÌÌà àMr.€Goode€raises€a€final€issue€concerning€the€amount€of€his€childÏsupport€arrearage.€€He€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€including€theÏmonths€of€November€and€December€1994€in€its€arrearage€calculation€becauseÍthe€payments€made€during€these€months€were€in€accordance€with€the€trialÏcourtððs€November€1,€1994€order€directing€him€to€continue€paying€childÏsupport€at€the€rate€of€$150€per€week€pending€a€hearing€on€the€merits.€€ThisÏargument€overlooks€the€fact€that€the€November€1,€1994€order€was€an€interimÏorder,€not€a€final€judgment.ÌÌà àAn€interim€order€is€one€that€adjudicates€an€issue€preliminarily;€while€aÏfinal€order€fully€and€completely€defines€the€partiesðð€rights€with€regard€to€theÏissue,€leaving€nothing€else€for€the€trial€court€to€do.€€òòVineyard€v.€Vineyard,€óó26ÏTenn.€App.€232,€241,€170€S.W.2d€917,€920€(1942);€Restatement€of€JudgmentsÏðð€41,€cmt.€a€(1942).€€Until€a€judgment€becomes€final,€it€remains€within€theÏcourtððs€control€and€may€be€modified€any€time€prior€to€the€entry€of€a€finalÏjudgment.€€òòStidham€v.€Fickle€Heirsóó,€643€S.W.2d€324,€328€(Tenn.€1982).€€ÌÌà àThe€November€1,€1994€order€was€intended€to€preserve€the€status€quoÏtemporarily€until€the€trial€court€could€conduct€a€hearing€on€the€merits.€€It€didÏnot€purport€to€adjudicate€Mr.€Goodeððs€child€support€obligation€because€at€theÏtime€it€was€entered,€the€trial€court€had€heard€no€proof€on€the€issue.€€In€fact,Ïthe€trial€court€€could€not€have€altered€Mr.€Goodeððs€child€support€obligation€atÏthat€time€because€Mr.€Goode€had€not€yet€filed€a€motion€seeking€a€reduction.€ÏAccordingly,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€including€the€months€of€NovemberÏand€December€1994€in€its€final€calculation€of€Mr.€Goodeððs€arrearage.ÌÌà@ àò òVI.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Willful€Civil€Contempt€Findingó óóóÌÌà àAs€a€final€matter,€Mr.€Goode€takes€issue€with€the€trial€courtððsÏdetermination€that€he€had€committed€ð ðwillful€civil€contemptðð€by€failing€to€payÏthe€full€amount€of€his€court„ordered€child€support€for€almost€eight€years.€€HeÏasserts€that€he€did€not€willfully€disregard€the€final€divorce€decree€because€heÏbelieved€in€good€faith€that€Ms.€McAllisterððs€October€27,€1986€agreementÏcontrolled€the€amount€of€his€child€support€obligation.ÌÌà àA€contemptuous€act€is€a€willful,€purposeful€failure€or€refusal€to€complyÏwith€a€court€order.€€òòHaynes€v.€Haynes,óó€904€S.W.2d€118,€120€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1995)€(holding€that€a€finding€of€willful€conduct€must€precede€a€judgment€forÏcontempt).€€On€at€least€two€occasions,€this€court€has€held€that€the€existence€of€aÏside€agreement€between€the€parties€with€regard€to€child€support€may€provide€aÏdefense€to€a€contempt€petition,€even€though€the€agreement€itself€isÏunenforceable.€€òòLaird€v.€Laird,óó€App.€No.€86„212„II,€1986€WL€14042,€at€*4Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€12,€1986)€(No€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)Ï(holding€that€an€agreement€precluded€a€finding€that€a€father€was€wilfullyÏrefusing€to€pay€child€support);€òòFederico€v.€Worley,óó€App.€No.€87„5„II,€1987ÏWL€11765,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€5,€1987),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.ÏAug.€31,€1987)€(holding€that€a€finding€of€contempt€in€the€face€of€an€agreementÏð ðwould€amount€to€a€gross€miscarriage€of€justiceðð).ÌÌà àMr.€Goode€and€Ms.€McAllister€entered€into€a€side€agreement€onÏOctober€27,€1986€that€Mr.€Goode€would€pay€$150€per€week€in€child€supportÏdespite€the€October€21,€1986€order€directing€him€to€pay€$250€per€week.€€TheÏrecord€contains€no€evidence€that€the€parties€did€not€enter€into€this€agreementÏin€good€faith€and€at€armsðð€length€or€that€either€party€knew€that€the€agreementÏwas€legally€unenforceable.€€With€the€evidence€in€this€posture,€the€trial€courtÍshould€not€have€found€that€Mr.€Goode€was€in€contempt€for€willfullyÏdisregarding€the€trial€courtððs€child€support€order€from€October€1986€throughÏAugust€1994.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Mr.ÏÔ_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€was€in€willful€civil€contempt€and,€on€remand,€direct€that€the€claim€forÏcontempt€be€dismissed.ÌÌà@ àò òVII.ó óÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€that€Mr.€Goode€owes€$42,700€inÏback€child€support€and€that€he€should€pay€$100€per€week€toward€thisÏarrearage.€€We€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Mr.€Goode€is€in€willfulÏcivil€contempt€and€remand€the€case€for€further€proceedings€to€set€Mr.€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_ÔððsÏprospective€child€support€in€accordance€with€this€opinion.€€We€tax€the€costs€ofÏthis€appeal€in€equal€proportions€against€Danny€Ô_ÔGoodeÔ_Ô€and€his€surety€and€to€theÏState€of€Tennessee€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.ÌÌ›ÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,ÏJUDGEÌÌœCONCUR:›ÌÌœ________________________________›ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGE€ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌBEN€H.€Ô_ÔCANTRELLÔ_Ô,€œJUDGE›œ›