ÿWPC£ !U8Þ 03 0<IU,… 0J± 0Tû 0^O 0h­ 0r 0|‡ 0† 0‰ 1u %Ž 0d” 0Bø 0C:B)}DC¦Æé AK¯ U*ú Ü$ R v~R vÓÐ< Œ 9p`( Book Antiqua:ù ÿÿ8WP DefaultsÓ  ÓÓ ÓÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  ÓÓ!€!ÓÓVL` °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#€%Ø'0*ˆ,à.813è5@8˜:VÓÓÓÔ€ÔÔ€XÔÔ  Ô< ÿÿ:InitialStyle< Œ 9p`(Geneva2 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)XP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$¡¡Ý ƒÿÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$òòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó% Line 7 d7Border 1…………ddƒ 1 2 3 4 5Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ÒÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÓ ` °—XÓÔ€ÔÔ€ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òAugust€18,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óÌ HòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ ` °—XÓÔ€Ôà àò òRule€10(b)€(Court€of€Appeals).ó ó€€òòMEMORANDUM€OPINION.óó€€The€Court,€withÏthe€concurrence€of€all€judges€participating€in€the€case,€may€affirm,€reverse€or€modifyÏthe€actions€of€the€trial€court€by€memorandum€opinion€when€a€formal€opinion€wouldÏhave€no€precedential€value.€€When€a€case€is€decided€by€memorandum€opinion€it€shallÏbe€designated€ð ðMEMORANDUM€OPINION,ðð€shall€not€be€published,€and€shall€not€beÏcited€or€relied€on€for€any€reason€in€a€subsequent€unrelated€case.€ÌPtPtHHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® 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 ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ystem Geneva ÒÒ  ystem Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ ` °—XÓÔ€ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌÓ  Ó______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌCAROL€STRONG,€à àà àà àà àShelby€Circuit€No.€152659€R.D.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.A.€No.€02A01„9701„CV„00005Ìà àPlaintiff,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHon.€George€H.€Brown,€Jr.,€JudgeÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌßL€;+'h|ùÍ ` á `€€LßTIMOTHY€RALPH€STRONG,ÌÌà àDefendant.ÌÌCAREN€DANTZKER,€Memphis,€Attorney€for€Plaintiff.ÌÌG.€KEITH€ROGERS,€JR.,€Memphis,€Attorney€for€Defendant.ÌÌò òòòAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óóóÌÌOpinion€filed:Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌÓ  ÓMEMORANDUM€OPINION× ƒ ××  ×ÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ó óÌÓ  Óà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÓÓà àThis€case€presents€a€procedural€issue€involving€T.R.C.P.€37.01.€€Carol€StrongÏ(hereafter€ð ðWifeðð)€filed€suit€for€divorce€in€the€Circuit€Court€of€Shelby€County€againstÏTimothy€Ralph€Strong€(hereafter€ð ðHusbandðð).€€Subsequently,€Wife€served€HusbandÏwith€a€set€of€eighteen€interrogatories.€€Husband€filed€an€answer€to€the€complaint€asÍwell€as€responses€to€the€interrogatories.€€Wife€thereafter€filed€a€Motion€to€CompelÏDiscovery€pursuant€to€T.R.C.P.€37.01,€contending€that€Husbandððs€responses€to€four€ofÏthe€interrogatories€were€incomplete€and€insufficient.€€The€trial€court€granted€WifeððsÏmotion€to€compel€and€ordered€Husband€to€answer€the€four€interrogatories.€€InÏaddition,€the€trial€court€ordered€Husband€and€his€counsel€to€pay€Wife€$500.00€asÏsanctions€for€failure€to€cooperate€with€discovery.€€Husbandððs€sole€issue€on€appeal€isÏwhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€Husband€and€his€counsel€to€pay€Wife€theÏ$500.00€pursuant€to€Rule€37€T.R.C.P..€€In€addition,€Wife€asks€this€court€to€findÏHusbandððs€appeal€to€be€frivolous€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€_€27„1„122.€€For€the€reasonsÏhereafter€stated,€we€affirm€the€trial€court,€find€the€appeal€to€be€frivolous€and€remand.Ìà àIt€is€well€established€in€this€state€that€regarding€a€motion€to€comply€the€trialÏcourt€has€the€ability€to€order€the€party€necessitating€the€motion,€and/or€the€partyððsÏattorney,€to€pay€reasonable€attorney€fees€for€services€that€were€necessary€to€in€orderÏto€obtain€the€order.€€Furthermore,€on€appeal€this€court€will€not€disturb€the€ruling€ofÏthe€trial€court€in€imposing€sanctions€and€awarding€costs,€unless€there€is€a€clear,Ïaffirmative€showing€by€the€appealing€party€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€ÏòòBenton€v.€Snyderóó,€825€S.W.2d€409,€416€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€ÌÇà àHusband€has€the€burden€of€proving€that€the€trial€judge€abused€its€discretion.€€InÏhis€attempt€to€carry€this€burden,€Husband€has€set€forth€five€different€reasons€as€to€whyÏthe€trial€court€was€in€error.€€First,€Husband€contends€that€he€was€not€allowed€aÏhearing€on€Wifeððs€Motion€to€Compel€Discovery,€and€in€violation€of€T.R.C.P.€37.01(4).€ÏIt€is€undisputed€that€counsel€for€both€parties€were€present€at€a€hearing€before€the€trialÏcourt€on€the€motion€to€compel€and€that€counsel€for€Husband€took€part€in€theÏarguments€before€that€court.€€While€Husband€may€have€been€absent,€there€is€no€proofÏin€the€record€as€to€any€restraint€being€placed€upon€him€to€prevent€him€from€attendingÏthe€hearing,€nor€was€there€any€request€by€counsel€for€a€continuance€of€the€hearing.€€ÏThis€argument€is€without€merit.Ìà àHusbandððs€next€contention€is€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€set€forth€the€basis€forÏthe€amount€of€the€sanction€and€to€state€that€the€levy€was€made€to€reimburse€Wife€forÏreasonable€expenses€and€attorney€fees.€€Wifeððs€motion€to€comply€specifically€called€forÏthe€award€of€attorney€fees€for€the€failure€of€Husband€to€comply,€and€the€trial€court€soÏfound.€€This€contention€is€without€merit.Ìà àNext,€Husband€contends€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€make€any€finding€thatÏHusband€failed€to€answer€any€of€the€interrogatories€properly€or€that€his€responsesÏwere€either€evasive€or€incomplete.€€T.R.C.P.€37.01(3)€states€that€an€evasive€orÏincomplete€answer€is€to€be€treated€as€a€failure€of€the€party€to€answer.€€The€courtÏordered€Husband€to€answer€four€of€the€interrogatories.€€While€not€expressly€stated€inÏthe€order,€the€existence€of€this€order€is€a€clear€finding€that€the€Husbandððs€previousÏresponses€were€inadequate.€€Ìà àNext,€Husband€contends€that€the€interrogatories€which€Husband€was€orderedÍto€answer€were€irrelevant€to€Wifeððs€divorce€action.€€The€trial€court€obviouslyÏdetermined€that€the€interrogatories€did€call€for€discoverable€information.€€ThisÏcontention€presents€no€abuse€of€discretion.Ìà àLastly,€Husband€contends€that€two€of€the€interrogatories,€number€15€and€17,Ïwhich€he€allegedly€gave€vague€answers€to,€were€themselves€vague.€€From€a€readingÏof€these€interrogatories€it€is€clear€that€they€both€were€specific€questions€dealing€withÏspecific€subjects.€€This€contention€is€without€merit.€€Ìà àIn€conclusion,€we€find€that€under€these€circumstances€this€appeal€is€frivolous.€ÏAccordingly,€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Circuit€Court€of€Shelby€County€for€furtherÏproceedings€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€_€27„1„122,€to€ascertain€the€amount€of€attorney€fees€toÏbe€paid€by€Husband€to€Wife€for€her€attorneyððs€services€in€connection€with€this€appeal.€ÏThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€in€this€cause€on€appeal€are€taxed€toÏHusband,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.à àà àà à(CONCURS)ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àLILLARD,€J.à àà àà à(CONCURS)Ì