ÿWPCà  ÷bM}ú >ÄÊiUNzÈU:ÌU: AQD Æ• 0D[ 0DŸ 0Dã ã D/' BV Bs D3 ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ’‹“D”D•–—E˜™VšÓ€¤©yË&(ÀÔôÈh3|x¥-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular úÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ XëPXXXÔÔ€ ôYX XëPÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ XëPX ôYÔÐ  ÐÌAugust€18,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular úÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XëPXXXÔÔ€ôYXXëPÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XëPXôYÔÐ  ÐÌAugust€12,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý›Ó  ÓÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑñ’ñœñ’ñò òÔ‡ X®pXXXÔñ’ñÑ  Ñœñ’ññ¤ññ¤ññ¤ññšñœñšñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` 8ttxP°ð  rßñ¤ññšññšññ¤ññ¤ñ›à@ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óˆÐ ° Ðò òñ¤ññ¤ñà@úú$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆØ Ðñ¤ññ¤ñÌóóñ¤ñœßt€ )>.*jx6` `€€@EÌ–` 8ttxP`ð 6 tß›ñ¤ñÌJOYCE€CHARLENE€PRESTON,à 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/Appellee,€€€€€€€€€€€à h à€€€€ò ò€€à À à)ó óà  àSumner€Chancery€No.€œ96D„282ñ’ñò òó óò òó óñ’ñ›à Ð àÐ $ t Ðœò òà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð  d Ðv.›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.€01A01„9806„CH„00289ò òÐ ì <  ÐJAMES€THURSTON€PRESTON,à h àà À à)à  àÐ Ü,  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àó óDefendant/Appellant.à  àà h àò òà À à)Ð ´  ÐÌÌÌà@¯¯ìàó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€SUMNER€COUNTYˆÐ h¸ Ðà@ùùìàAT€GALLATIN,€TENNESSEEˆÌÌÌà@D D ìàTHE€HONORABLE€TOM€E.€GRAY,€CHANCELLORˆÌòòÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/€Appelleeóó:òòà  àà h àà À àFor€the€DefendantÔ#†X ‘XX X®pŠ#ÔÔ‡ X®pXXX ‘Ô/Appellantóó:òòÐ Ü, ÐÌóóJohn€M.€Cannon€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à h àà À àF.€Dulin€Kelly€€€€€€€€Ð ´ ÐGoodlettsville,€Tennesseeà  àà h àà À àClinton€L.€Kelly€€€€Ð  ð Ѐà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAndy€L.€AllmanÐ ŒÜ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHendersonville,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌò òÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð Ø&("% Ðà  àÌÌÌCONCURS:ÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.Ð `,°'+ ÐÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.€€€€Ô#†X ‘XX X®p# #ÔÐ  8.ˆ)- ÐØØÓÓÑ7€ ‘XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñà@55'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ ° Ðà  àThis€is€a€divorce€case.€€The€parties€signed€a€œprenuptial›€agreement€prior€to€their€marriage.€€TheÏwife€became€disabled€after€the€parties€had€been€married€approximately€eight€œmonths,›€and€the€partiesÏseparated.€€The€trial€court€held€the€œprenuptial›€agreement€invalid€and€awarded€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€TheÐ P   Ðhusband€appeals.€€We€affirm.Ìà  àDefendant/Appellant€œJames›€Thurston€Preston€(ð ðHusbandðð)€owned€the€GooseCreek€Inn€inÏFranklin,€Tennessee.€€Plaintiff/Appellee,€Joyce€Charlene€Preston€(ð ðWifeðð)€worked€as€a€desk€clerkÏat€the€Inn.€€After€a€relationship€of€approximately€seven€years,€the€parties€married€in€October,€1995.€ÏIt€is€undisputed€that,€for€many€years€prior€to€the€marriage,€Wife€had€episodes€of€alcohol€abuse.€ÏHusband€asserts€that,€prior€to€their€marriage,€Wife€promised€to€stop€drinking.€Ìà  àOn€the€day€of€their€marriage,€Husband€presented€Wife€with€a€œprenuptial›€agreement,€whichÏshe€signed.€€At€the€time€of€their€marriage,€Wife€was€54€years€œold,›€and€Husband€was€65€years€old.€ÏDuring€the€marriage,€Wife€did€not€work€outside€the€home.Ìà  àThe€parties€had€a€short€and€tumultuous€marriage.€€Each€accused€the€other€of€verbal€andÏphysical€abuse.€€Husband€contended€that€after€their€marriage€Wife€again€began€drinking€too€much.€ÏWife€accused€Husband€of€constantly€criticizing€her€cooking€and€housekeeping;€Husband€œsaid›€thatÏWife€didnððt€cook€or€clean.€€Wife€accused€Husband€of€physically€abusing€her€by€shoving€her€into€a€Ïcloset€and€injuring€her€neck.Ìà  àIn€June,€1996,€approximately€eight€months€after€the€partiesðð€marriage,€Wife€suffered€aÏcerebral€stroke.€€The€parties€dispute€Husbandððs€reaction€to€the€stroke.€€Wife€asserts€that,€when€sheÏsuffered€the€stroke,€Husband€ð ðholleredðð€at€her,€kicked€her,€accused€her€of€faking€her€condition,Ïrefused€to€seek€medical€attention€for€her,€and€left€her€to€have€lunch€with€his€former€mother„in„lawÏand€his€son.€€Husband€denied€this€behavior.€€He€said€that€he€was€supportive€œof›€her€and€offeredÏseveral€times€to€take€her€to€the€hospital,€which€Wife€refused.€€He€said€Wife€began€verbally€abusingÏhim,€so€he€left€to€have€lunch€with€his€former€mother„in„law€and€his€son.Ìà  àWife€was€admitted€to€the€hospital€for€the€stroke.€€It€is€undisputed€that€Husband€did€not€comeÏto€the€hospital€to€see€her€for€several€days.€€Husband€said€that€Wife€told€him€not€to€come€to€theÏhospital.€€Regardless,€after€several€days,€Husband€came€to€the€hospital€to€see€Wife.€€Wife€asserts€thatÏHusband€started€an€argument€with€her€in€her€hospital€room€and€that€a€nurse€made€Husband€leave.€ÏHusband€said€that€when€he€visited€Wife€in€the€hospital,€she€began€yelling€at€him€and€asked€a€nurseÐ ;`6: Ðto€make€him€leave.€It€is€undisputed€that,€when€Wife€was€discharged€from€the€hospital,€she€stayedÏwith€her€œmother,›€and€the€parties€did€not€thereafter€live€together.Ìà  àAfter€the€stroke,€Wife€was€permanently€disabled.€€It€is€undisputed€that€she€is€unable€to€drive,Ïto€read,€or€to€work.€€Her€condition€is€permanent.Ìà  àOn€July€16,€1996,€Wife€filed€for€œdivorce.€€Husband›€filed€an€answer€and€œcounterclaimed›€forÏdivorce.€€Pending€trial,€Husband€was€ordered€to€pay€Wife€$1,750€per€month€in€support,€as€well€asÏother€expenses.€€The€trial€court€appointed€a€guardian€ad€litem€for€Wife€to€determine€her€ability€toÏtestify.€€The€guardian€ad€litem€concluded€that€Wife€could€testify€but€might€become€emotional.Ìà  àIn€the€hearing€in€this€cause,€the€trial€court€heard€lengthy€testimony€from€both€parties,€as€wellÏas€several€other€witnesses.€€In€the€hearing,€Wife€contended€that€she€signed€the€œprenuptial›€agreementÏunder€duress€and€that€there€was€not€a€full€and€fair€disclosure€of€Husbandððs€assets€prior€to€executionÏof€the€agreement.€€Husband€contended€that€the€œprenuptial›€agreement€signed€by€the€parties€includedÏan€attachment€listing€his€assets.€€Husband€said€that€the€attachment€could€not€be€located€after€theÏpartiesðð€marriage.€€Husband€asserted€that€Wife€was€knowledgeable€about€his€financial€assets€because,Ïat€times€prior€to€their€marriage,€œshe€worked›€for€Husbandððs€business€as€an€accountant€andÏbookkeeper.€€The€trial€court€heard€detailed€testimony€regarding€the€partiesðð€financial€issues€and€theÏpartiesðð€proposed€property€division.€Ìà  àHusband€testified€that€his€income€from€all€sources€is€approximately€$20,600€per€month,€orÏover€$240,000€per€year.€€After€the€parties€separated,€Wife€began€drawing€Social€Security€disabilityÏbenefits€of€$530€per€month.€€She€received€a€lump€sum€Social€Security€payment€of€approximatelyÏ$2,000€as€well.€€Both€parties€submitted€detailed€proposals€for€dividing€the€personal€property.Ìà  àThe€trial€court€considered€the€deposition€of€a€neurologist,€Mary€Ellen€Clinton,€M.D.,€whoÏconducted€an€independent€medical€examination€of€Wife.€€Dr.€Clinton€testified€that€the€stroke€had€leftÏWife€with€significant€visual€impairment€as€well€as€depression€and€other€physical€problems.€€Dr.ÏClinton€believed€that€Wife€exaggerated€her€œproblems›€and€described€having€to€ð ðdevise€techniques€toÏdistractðð€Wife€in€order€to€evaluate€how€much€she€could€see.€€Dr.€Clinton€felt€that€Wife€could€see€wellÏenough€to€take€care€of€her€personal€needs.€€However,€she€believed€that€she€would€have€substantialÏdifficulty€reading,€and€said€that€she€is€unable€to€drive€and€unable€to€be€gainfully€employed.€€Dr.ÏClinton€confirmed€that€Wifeððs€condition€is€permanent.€€Ð 09€48 Ðà  àAfter€considering€the€testimony€and€other€evidence,€the€trial€court€issued€a€written€order€withÏa€memorandum€detailing€its€factual€findings.€€It€found€that€Wife€did€not€sign€the€œprenuptial›Ïagreement€under€duress,€but€found€that€Husband€had€not€proven€that€Wife€was€fully€knowledgeableÏabout€the€value€of€his€assets€or€that€he€had€made€full€disclosure€prior€to€execution€of€the€agreement.€ÏConsequently,€the€trial€court€held€the€œprenuptial›€agreement€invalid€and€unenforceable.Ìà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€Wife€was€not€a€credible€witness.€€It€noted€that€it€did€not€accept€allÏof€Husbandððs€testimony,€but€found€him€ð ðmore€credible€than€his€wife.ðð€€The€trial€œjudge€generally›Ïcredited€Husbandððs€version€of€the€events€surrounding€Wifeððs€stroke€and€subsequent€hospitalization.€Ïñ’ñœñ’ñà  àThe€trial€court€noted€Dr.€Clintonððs€testimony€that€Wife€exaggerated€her€condition,€butÏconcluded,€as€did€Dr.€Clinton,€that€Wife€can€no€longer€drive€and€ð ðcannot€be€gainfully€employed.ððÌà  àThe€trial€court€found€both€parties€at€fault€for€the€demise€of€the€marriage.€€It€detailed€theÏdivision€of€the€partiesðð€personal€property€and€real€property.Ìà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€Wife€used€her€physical€disability€to€avoid€cooperating€withÏdiscovery.€€It€noted€that€Wife€had€not€presented€evidence€of€how€she€spent€the€spousal€support€fromÏHusband€and€the€Social€Security€disability€income,€and€inferred€that€Wife€ð ðwas€hiding€matters€aboutÏher€economics.ðð€€Ìà  àNevertheless,€on€Wifeððs€request€for€alimony,€the€trial€court€œfound:›ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àJoyce€Charlene€Preston€has€a€need€for€support.€€James€Thurston€Preston€hasÏthe€ability€to€pay.€€Mrs.€Preston€is€entitled€to€alimony€in€futuro.€€She€is€no€longer€able€Ïto€work€outside€the€home.€€The€Social€Security€Disability€she€is€receiving€is€notÏsufficient€to€meet€her€monthly€expenses.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓThe€trial€court€found€that€Wife€needed€$2,080€per€month€to€meet€her€monthly€expenses.€€It€awardedÏher€$1,550€per€month€in€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€Ð  +p&) Ðà  àHusband€had€asserted€that€Wife€did€not€disclose€to€him€the€$11,600€she€received€in€SocialÏSecurity€disability€income€during€the€pendency€of€the€œproceedingsñ“ñ,ñ“ñ›€and€sought€to€recoup€theseÏmonies.€€The€trial€court€œfound€this€request€justified,€and€held:›ÌÓÓà8  àà ` àIn€consideration€of€the€$11,600.00€Social€Security€Disability€received€inÏœaddition€to›€payments€by€James€Thurston€Preston€of€$1,750.00€spousal€support,€theÏpayment€of€the€mortgage€on€the€marital€residence,€the€payment€of€the€mortgage€onÏthe€condominium,€the€minimum€monthly€payment€on€her€MasterCard€through€ChevyÏChase€Bank,€and€the€payment€of€her€health€insurance,€the€œCourt›€awards€no€alimonyÏin€gross€œfor›€attorney€fees.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓFrom€this€order,€Husband€now€appeals.Ð 09€48 Ðà  àOn€appeal€Husband€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€the€œprenuptial›€agreementÏinvalid,€and€in€awarding€alimony€to€Wife.€€Husband€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€awarded€WifeÏ$11,600€in€attorneyððs€œfees›€and€asserts€that€this€was€an€error.ÌÔ‡ XhDXXX\ÉÔò òà  àÔ#†X\ÉXX XhD!.#ÔÔ‡ X>wXXX\ÉÔó óSince€this€case€was€tried€by€the€trial€court€sitting€without€a€jury,€we€review€the€case€òòde€novoóóÐ P   Ðupon€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court.€€œTenn.ÏRñ”ñ€ñ”ñ.ñ•ñ€ñ•ñApp.€P.›€13(d).ò òÔ#†X\ÉXX X>wr.#ÔÔ‡ XhDXXX\ÉÔòòÐ P  ÐóóÔ#†X\ÉXX XhDÁ/#Ô€ó óà  àHusband€argues€first€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€thatÐ Ø(  ÐWife€was€not€sufficiently€knowledgeable€about€Husbandððs€financial€assets€and€that€Husband€did€notÏmake€full€and€fair€disclosure€of€his€assets€prior€to€execution€of€the€œprenuptial›€agreement.€€HeÏcontends€that€the€œprenuptial›€agreement€should€be€deemed€valid€and€should€be€enforced.Ìà  àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„3„501€provides:ÌÓÓà8  àœ[A]ny›€antenuptial€or€prenuptial€agreement€entered€into€by€spouses€concerningÏproperty€owned€by€either€spouse€before€the€marriage€which€is€the€subject€of€suchÏagreement€shall€be€binding€upon€any€court€having€jurisdiction€over€such€spousesÏand/or€such€œagreement€if€such€agreement›€is€œdetermined,›€in€the€discretion€of€suchÏcourt,€to€have€been€entered€into€by€such€spouses€freely,€knowledgeably€and€in€goodÏfaith€and€without€exertion€of€duress€or€undue€influence€upon€either€œspouse.€.€.€.›Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓœTennessee›€Code€Annotated€ðð€œ36„3„501€(1996).€€ñ’ñ›ò òó óñ’ñThe›€ð ðknowledgeðð€component€of€the€statute€has€beenÏinterpreted€to€mean:ÌÓÓà8  àœ[t]hat›€the€spouse€seeking€to€enforce€an€antenuptial€agreement€must€œprove,›€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence,€either€that€a€full€and€fair€disclosure€of€the€nature,Ïextent€and€value€of€his€or€her€holdings€was€provided€to€the€spouse€seeking€to€avoidÏthe€agreement,€or€that€disclosure€was€unnecessary€because€the€spouse€seeking€toÏavoid€the€agreement€had€independent€knowledge€of€the€full€nature,€extent,€and€valueÏof€the€proponent€spouseððs€holdings.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌò òòòÓÓRandolph€v.€Randolphó óóó,€937€S.W.2d€815,€817€(Tenn.€1996).€€Thus,€Husband€in€this€case€had€theÐ *h%( Ðburden€of€proving€that€full€disclosure€was€made,€or€in€the€œalternative,›€that€Wife€had€sufficient€priorÏknowledge€of€his€assets.Ìà  àHusband€in€this€case€maintained€that€a€schedule€of€his€assets€was€attached€to€the€prenuptialÏagreement€when€Wife€signed€it.€€However,€a€copy€of€the€schedule€could€not€be€produced€at€œtrial,›€andÏWife€disputed€its€existence.€€In€the€alternative,€Husband€contended€that€Wife€had€full€knowledge€ofÏhis€financial€assets€prior€to€execution€of€the€agreement€through€her€employment€with€him.€€WifeÏacknowledged€doing€some€bookkeeping€for€one€of€Husbandððs€œbusinesses€but›€denied€havingÏknowledge€of€his€other€businesses€or€knowledge€of€his€personal€assets.Ð 9h48 Ðà  àAlthough€the€trial€court€generally€concluded€that€Wife€was€not€a€credible€œwitness›€and€foundÏthat€Husband€was€ð ðmore€credible€than€his€wife,ðð€the€trial€court€noted€that€it€did€not€accept€all€ofÏHusbandððs€testimony.€€With€regard€to€the€prenuptial€agreement,€the€trial€court€found€that€HusbandÏhad€not€proven€that€Wife€was€fully€knowledgeable€about€his€assets€or€that€full€disclosure€was€made.€ÏOn€this€issue,€then,€the€trial€court€implicitly€credited€Wifeððs€œtestimony.ò ò€€ó óWhen€the€resolution€of€theÐ 0 € Ðissues€in€a€case€depends€upon€the€truthfulness€of€witnesses,€the€trial€judge€who€has€the€opportunityÏto€observe€the€witnesses€in€their€manner€and€demeanor€while€testifying€is€in€a€far€better€position€thanÏthis€Court€to€decide€those€issues.€€ò òòòMcCaleb€v.€Saturn€Corp.ó óóó,€910€S.W.2d€412,€415€(Tenn.€1995);òòò òÐ Ð  ÐWhitaker€v.€Whitakeróóó ó,€957€S.W.2d€834,€837€(Tenn.€App.€1997).€€The€weight,€faith,€and€credit€to€beÐ ° Ðgiven€to€any€witnessððs€testimony€lies€in€the€first€instance€with€the€trier€of€fact,€and€the€credibilityÏaccorded€will€be€given€great€weight€by€the€appellate€court.€€òòò òIdó óóó.;€ò òòòIn€re€Estate€of€Walton€v.€Youngó óóó,Ð pÀ Ð950€S.W.2d€956,€959€(Tenn.€1997).ò ò€€ñ’ñó óò òñ’ñó óConsidering›€the€trial€courtððs€implicit€determination€of€theÐ P  Ðpartiesðð€credibility€on€this€issue,€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððsÏconclusion€that€the€ð ðknowledgeðð€component€of€the€statute€was€€not€met€and€that€the€prenuptialÏagreement€was€therefore€invalid€and€unenforceable.€€The€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€onÏthis€issue.Ìà  àHusband€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€He€stresses€theÐ °"  Ðshort€duration€of€the€partiesðð€marriage,€noting€that€they€cohabited€for€only€eight€months€prior€toÏWifeððs€œstroke,›€and€the€partiesðð€ensuing€separation.€€Husband€points€to€testimony€from€Dr.€ClintonÏindicating€that€past€alcohol€abuse€can€contribute€to€the€cause€of€€a€œstroke›€and€argues€that€there€is€noÏevidence€that€Wifeððs€stroke€result€from€anything€that€transpired€during€the€marriage.Ìà  àIn€response,€Wife€emphasizes€Husbandððs€income€of€over€$240,000€per€year,€as€well€as€theÏunequivocal€testimony€of€Dr.€Clinton€that€Wife€is€unable€to€drive€and€unable€to€work,€and€that€herÏdisability€is€permanent.€€Wife€points€to€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Wife€has€a€great€need€forÏalimony€and€that€Husband€unquestionably€has€the€ability€to€pay.Ìà  àThe€determination€of€the€amount€of€alimony€in€a€given€case€is€in€the€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt.€€ò òòòFord€v.€Fordó óóó,€952€S.W.2d€824,€827€(Tenn.€App.€œ1996)€(citing€ò òòòIngram€v.€Ingramó óóó,721€S.W.2dÐ p5À04 Ð262,€264€(Tenn.€App€1986)).›€€On€appeal,€ð ðwide€latitudeðð€is€given€€to€the€trial€courtððs€decisions€onÏspousal€support.€€ò òòòCrain€v.€Crainó óóó,€925€S.W.2d€232,€233€(Tenn.€App.€€1996).€€It€has€long€beenÐ 09€48 Ðrecognized€that€the€two€most€important€factors€in€determining€an€award€of€alimony€are€ð ðthe€real€needÏof€the€spouse€seeking€the€supportðð€and€ð ðthe€ability€of€the€obligor€spouse€to€provide€œsupport.ðð€€ò òòòFordó óóó,Ð à Ð952€S.W.2d€at€827.€€ñ’ñò òñ’ñòòñ’ñó óñ’ñóóThe›€short€duration€of€the€marriage€is€a€factor€to€consider.€€ò òòòCrainó óóó,€925€S.W.2dÐ pÀ Ðat€234.€€However,€it€is€not€determinative.€€An€additional€consideration€is€whether€the€spouse€seekingÏsupport€œwould›€become€a€public€charge€in€the€absence€of€spousal€support.€€Indeed,€this€is€soÏdisfavored€that€an€otherwise€enforceable€antenuptial€agreement€is€void€and€unenforceable€ifÏenforcing€the€contractual€prohibition€against€alimony€œwould›€result€in€the€spouse€being€ð ðrendered€aÏpublic€charge.€.€.€.ðð€€œò òòòCary€v.€Caryó óóó,›€937€S.W.2d€œ777,€782ñ–ñ€(ñ–ññ—ññ–ñtENN.€199ñ–ññ—ññ˜ñTenn€1996)ñ˜ñ.›€€Ð Ð  Ðà  àIn€this€case,€there€is€no€solution€that€is€completely€equitable€to€both€parties.€€Clearly€this€isÏa€marriage€of€exceptionally€short€duration.€€However,€Wifeððs€need€for€alimony€is€great,€andÏHusbandððs€ability€to€pay€is€clear.€€Wife€has€no€source€of€income€except€Social€Security€and€spousalÏsupport€from€Husband.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€trial€court€abusedÏits€discretion€in€awarding€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€Obviously€the€alimony€award€may€be€subject€to€futureÐ 0€ Ðmodification€if€Wife€becomes€eligible€for€additional€income,€such€as€additional€Social€SecurityÏbenefits.€€The€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€on€this€issue.Ìà  àHusband€argues€on€appeal€that€the€trial€court€awarded€Wife€$11,600€in€attorneyððs€fees€asÏalimony€òòin€grossóó.€€In€its€final€order,€the€trial€court€stated:Ð °"  ÐÓÓà8  àœà ` àJames›€Thurston€Preston€filed€on€the€22nd€day€of€œDecember,›€1997€a€òòMotionÐ $à" Ðfor€Credit€of€Extra€Income€Received€by€Plaintiffóó€moving€the€œCourt›€that€he€be€givenÐ €%Ð # Ða€credit€for€the€$11,600.00€of€undisclosed€income€received€by€the€plaintiff€against€theÏdivision€of€marital€assets€or€any€order€of€support€œthat€this›€Court€may€enter.€€TheÏCourt€finds€the€motion€well„taken.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌà@$$(ìà*€*€*ˆÌÌà8  àœà ` àIn›€consideration€of€the€$11,600.00€Social€Security€Disability€received€inÏaddition€to€payments€by€James€Thurston€Preston€of€$1,750.00€spousal€support,€theÏpayment€of€the€mortgage€on€the€martial€residence,€the€payment€of€the€mortgage€onÏthe€condominium,€the€minimum€monthly€payment€on€her€MasterCard€through€ChevyÏœChase›€Bank,€and€the€payment€of€her€health€insurance,€the€Court€awards€no€alimonyÏññòòññin€grossññóóññ€for€œattorneyññððsññ›€fees.Ð Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓœñ‘ñ(emphasis›€in›€original).›€›€ñ‘ñWe›€must€conclude€from€the€Order€that€the€trial€court,€in€its€discretion,€declined€to€award€attorneyððsÏfees€to€Wife€in€light€of€the€undisclosed€income,€as€well€as€other€factors.€€The€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€decision€on€this€issue.Ìœñ™ñÐ  @837 Ðñ™ñ›à  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant,€forÏwhich€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓÔ‡ X>wXXX\ÉÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð P   Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð < Œ Ðó óà  àò òÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð Ø(  ÐóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.€J.,€W.S.Ð Ä  ÐÌÌó óòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆØ Ðóóò òDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ó óÔ#†X\ÉXX X>wxS#Ô