ÿWPC  JŬ£0j·í$4oêê¶”L,Íœ+H´_8=&ÙdXù=ñ¿Éè$Øt®#M)å"¿·F@%”ñ†BÀÏäÃBœ^Άânë.,g”怼±Ê•±ºÅ(™'žÝ‚"ܨÖ[™Ø'רŸ9q „ÃÓXNÐy*ÉÍËzOgÌ :¨ÚBÈÉ}Aö"Ž´êÂü¥í \Ý9à^ã\6סRNþ±0]1,ñÚ™·>8Ô›v4눛{q:—Z8±ÉÚ.ì‡F^]·Êü‰ÕÎ0ÈžÔÓZ<ó™_Š”(2«~ß+–ƒsNdÅ«n!å{-äñi¥ó¸ÂóHpd˜ÙXèÔtùÞ¯°^W–‹×„{¹FnØLJ¦`èÒ¢Z£™ ~¯ÝǪ¥Ä™òC]¢¯ÁÉsç­°?''Öç¥æŠ{B`)# >UNI %— 0(w@Å4(U:0U<:jL¤ð-ø(%U:MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM AQ‡ÆØ 0Dž 0Dâ 0D& & D/j B™ B¶ D3Ó ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ % Ze& ' g( î) U* + , g- Ó€9 n~<$x3|x9 , øð AZ‹"Arial RegularÇ"Arial RegularC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT #Ñ#€  Xÿÿd#Ñ Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XDïXXXÔÔ€' XXDïÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XDïX' ÔÐ  ÐÌò òOctober€14,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôhúôXXDïÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó 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›ñ& ñÓÓñ& ñÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TќԀ XDïXXXÔñ' ñÑ7€ ‚\ XXdðdÈ7Ññ' ñ›Ó  Óñ' ñœñ' ññ' ñÑ7€ oõ XXdðXXdð7Ñœñ' ññ( ññ' ñœñ' ññ( ññ, ñÑ€ {bÑñ, ññ- ñ›ñ- ññ( ññ( ññ- ññ- ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ- ñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrßñ- ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ- ñ›ñ- ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñ›ñ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñ›ñ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñ›ñ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñ›ñ( ññ9 ññ9 ñ›ñ9 ññ( ñà@m m ìàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñà@hh%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÌñ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ññ( ññ9 ññ9 ññ( ñÌñ( ññ9 ñœßt€(>.*jx` `€€@Eåx` ttx$t Øtß›ñ9 ññ( ñÌñ( ññ( ñJOEL€R.€SUMMERS,à  àà h àà À à)€€Ð `° Ðñ( ññ( ñà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àà ` àó óPlaintiff/Appellee,à h àà À àò ò)€€Carroll€Chancery€No.€96„DR„123Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌVS.à  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€Appeal€No.€02A01„9709„CH„00230Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌLISA€CAROL€SUMMERS,à  àà h à)Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àà ` àó óDefendant/Appellant.à À àò ò)ó óÐ À  ÐÌÌà@ìàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€CARROLL€COUNTYˆÌà@ìàAT€HUNTINGDON,€TENNESSEEˆÌà@ ìàTHE€HONORABLE€WALTON€WEST,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òC.€DAVID€JONESÐ tÄ ÐTHE€JONES€LAW€FIRMó óÐ `° ÐHuntingdon,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppellantÌÌÌò òSTEVEN€L.€WESTÐ ä 4 ÐWEST€&€WEST€ATTORNEYSÌó óMcKenzie,€TennesseeÐ ¼" ! ÐAttorney€for€AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÐ  (p#' ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.Ð l0¼+0 ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ó óñ( ñà  àœñ) ñÐ Ì738 ÐÌÌÌñ) ññ- ññ) ñÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ#€  Xÿÿd#ÑÑ  Ññ) ññ- ññ+ ññ* ñÓ€Óñ* ññ+ ññ+ ñÓÓñ+ ññ) ñà  àñ) ñDefendant,›€Lisa€Carol€Summers,€(hereinafter€referred€to€as€ð ðWifeðð€or€ð ðMs.Ð j;º6< ÐÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  Ññ9 ñÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  Ññ9 ññ- ñÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ {bÑÑ7€ oõ XXdð XXdð7ÑÑ  Ññ- ñSummersðð)€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€order€granting€divorce€to€both€parties,€awardingÏcustody€of€the€minor€child,€Joseph,€to€Plaintiff,€Joel€Russell€Summers€(hereinafter€referredÏto€as€ð ðHusbandðð€or€ð ðMr.€Summersðð),€awarding€the€marital€residence€to€Husband,€valuingÏthe€marital€residence€at€$130,000.00,€and€awarding€Husband€a€lien€against€one€half€of€theÏchild€support€arrearage€Wife€might€collect€for€her€two€children€from€a€previous€marriage.ÌÌòòò òà@Ñ Ñ ìàI.€Factual€and€Procedural€Historyó óóóˆÐ xÈ  ÐÌà  àThe€parties€were€married€in€1984.€Wife€had€two€children€from€a€previous€marriage,Ïa€son,€age€18€at€the€time€of€trial,€and€a€daughter,€age€15€at€the€time€of€trial.€One€child€wasÏborn€of€the€marriage,€a€son,€born€August€1992.ÌÌà  àDuring€the€partiesðð€marriage,€Wife€attended€college€beginning€in€1986.€SheÏgraduated€in€1990.€During€the€process€of€Wifeððs€obtaining€a€college€degree,€HusbandÏassisted€in€supporting€his€wife€and€rearing€of€her€two€children.ÌÌà  àHusband€complains€that€serious€problems€began€between€the€parties€in€January€ofÏ1996.€He€objected€to€his€wife€staying€away€from€home€overnight€on€what€he€consideredÏa€frequent€basis.€He€insists€that€Wife€did€not€consult€him€about€these€business€andÏpersonal€trips€nor€did€she€ask€him€to€accompany€her.€He€further€contends€that€his€wifeÏwould€not€reveal€the€location€where€she€was€staying€on€these€trips,€providing€him€only€withÏa€beeper€number€of€the€woman€traveling€with€her.€€He€maintains€that€Wife€pursued€herÏown€interests€while€he€stayed€at€home€with€the€children.ÌÌà  àAdditionally,€Husband€complained€that€Wife€frequented€drag€races€wearing€ð ðtightÏtopsðð€and€ð ðtight€shortsðð€which€he€considered€inappropriate€attire.€He€further€objected€toÏWifeððs€intentions€to€get€a€tattoo€and€complained€that€Wife€was€dressing€like€a€teenager€andÏpaying€unusual€attention€to€tanning,€running,€and€walking.Ìà  àHusband€testified€that€when€Wife€was€taking€up€night€classes,€she€would€oftenÏreturn€home€during€the€early€morning€hours€even€though€her€classes€were€finished€at€9:00Ð Ø8(4: Ðp.m.€He€further€alleged€that€Wife€had€a€ð ðhickeyðð€on€her€neck€upon€arriving€home€after€oneÏof€her€business€trips€to€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee.ÌÌà  àWife€denied€all€of€the€above€alleged€acts€or€conduct€on€her€part.ÌÌà  àHusband€admitted€asking€his€wife€if€she€was€having€an€affair€with€one€man€andÏquestioning€her€about€an€affair€with€another€man€and€with€another€woman.€In€JanuaryÏ1996,€Wife€moved€out€of€the€house€due€to€the€partiesðð€arguing€and€stayed€gone€for€fiveÏdays.€Wifeððs€son€from€a€previous€marriage€remained€in€the€home€of€the€Husband€duringÏthat€time€period.€Wife€returned€to€the€marital€home€for€the€sake€of€her€daughter€from€aÏprevious€marriage€and€for€the€sake€of€the€partiesðð€son.€Thereafter,€there€was€not€much€ofÏa€relationship€between€the€parties.€ÌÌà  àAs€mentioned€above,€Wife€began€taking€night€classes€in€Jackson,€Tennessee,€inÏApril€of€1995.€This€lasted€for€several€months.€Wife€testified€that€she€left€immediately€afterÏthe€classes€were€over€and€went€directly€home.ÌÌà  àWife€works€in€the€computer€industry.€Her€job€has€required€that€she€travel€overnightÏfor€various€projects€and€assignments.€She€testified€that€in€the€summer€of€1995€herÏhusband€became€agitated€due€to€her€trips€and€because€she€would€bring€work€home€withÏher€due€to€her€increased€responsibility.€€In€July€1995,€Wife€had€to€be€away€from€home€forÏapproximately€one€week€due€to€a€job€assignment.€Thereafter,€in€September€of€1995,€sheÏhad€to€again€be€away€from€home€for€approximately€one€week,€and€she€says€her€husbandÏbecame€ð ðirateðð€because€she€was€having€to€stay€away€from€home.ÌÌà  àWife€stated€that€Husband€is€envious€of€her€job.€She€also€indicated€that€HusbandÏpreferred€staying€home€rather€than€taking€trips.€During€the€course€of€her€businessÏassignments,€she€has€been€to€California,€Las€Vegas,€and€on€five€or€six€occasions€to€NewÏYork.€Trips€to€Mexico€may€be€in€her€future€with€her€present€employer.ÌÐ Ì84: Ðà  àWife€denies€any€affairs€with€co„workers€but€acknowledges€that€fact€that€there€wereÏrumors€at€her€place€of€employment€concerning€a€co„worker€and€herself.€€In€addition€to€theÏabove,€Husband€inspected€Wifeððs€underwear,€and€based€on€these€inspections,€madeÏcertain€accusations€about€wifeððs€sexual€involvement€with€another€person.€Wife€testified€thatÏthese€accusations€made€her€ð ðfeel€awful.ðð€€She€was€hurt€by€the€fact€that€her€husband€wouldÏexamine€her€underwear€with€these€suspicions.ÌÌà  àDustin€Vaughn,€the€eldest€son€of€Mrs.€Summers,€testified€that€he€and€Mr.€SummersÏhad€a€good€relationship€and€that€Mr.€Summers€had€always€treated€him€good€and€helpedÏto€provide€for€him€as€well€as€his€sister.€He€also€testified€that€during€the€twelve€years€thatÏMr.€Summers€helped€to€care€for€him€that€he€had€not€had€any€contact€with€his€biologicalÏfather,€and€that€his€biological€father€had€not€provided€any€support€for€him.€Dustin€alsoÏtestified€that€Mr.€Summers€was€a€ð ðgoodðð€dad€and€got€along€with€Joseph€(the€minor€son€ofÏthe€parties)€ð ðgreat.ððÌÌà  àDustin€also€testified€that€there€was€one€occasion€that€there€was€a€party€at€Mrs.ÏSummersðð€home€after€the€separation€where€there€were€kids€at€the€party€under€the€age€ofÏtwenty„one€who€were€drinking€alcoholic€beverages.€Dustin€stated€that€he€had€not€askedÏhis€mother€permission€to€have€a€drinking€party€but€that€his€mother€had€said€to€him€on€priorÏoccasions€that€she€would€rather€have€him€and€his€friends€drink€at€her€home€where€theyÏwould€not€be€out€driving.€Dustin€indicated€that€some€of€those€who€had€been€at€Mrs.ÏSummersðð€house€drove€their€cars€home.€€Dustin€also€indicated€that€at€the€time€he€lived€atÏMr.€Summersðð€home€when€friends€came€over€there€was€never€any€drinking€in€the€home€ofÏMr.€Summers.ÌÌà  àDustin€testified€that€Mr.€Summers€was€the€individual€who€primarily€took€care€of€theÏdiscipline€in€the€home.€He€testified€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Summers€shared€the€housework€atÏthe€time€they€lived€together.ÌÌà  àDustin€testified€that€he€felt€welcome€to€go€visit€with€Mr.€Summers€and€to€go€see€himÐ Ì84: Ðand€that€he€could€go€over€to€see€Joseph€any€time€he€wanted€to.€He€also€testified€that€heÏworked€two€jobs€and€that€when€he€was€not€working€he€did€other€things€that€eighteen€yearÏolds€do€such€as€ð ðtour€the€strip,ðð€go€to€his€girlfriendððs€house,€and€call€his€friends€on€his€carÏphone.€He€sees€Joseph€around€his€other€schedule.ÌÌà  àThe€minor€daughter€of€Mrs.€Summers,€Emily,€testified€that€she€and€Mr.€SummersÏgot€along€ð ðokðð€and€even€though€he€was€her€step„dad€that€he€treated€her€like€a€ð ðdadðð€would.ÏShe€testified€that€Mr.€Summers€was€a€good€father€to€Joseph.€She€testified€that€Mr.ÏSummers€did€cooking€cleaning€and€ð ðstuff€like€that.ðð€She€also€testified€that€she€feltÏcomfortable€in€calling€Mr.€Summers€if€she€needed€anything€and€that€she€would€feelÏcomfortable€going€to€his€house€to€visit€with€the€minor€child€Joseph,€although€she€wouldÏprefer€to€have€Joseph€live€with€her€at€her€house.Ì€€Ìà  àJessica€Ward,€friend€of€Emily€Summers,€testified€that€pursuant€to€conversations€withÏEmily,€she€felt€that€Emily€wanted€Joseph€to€live€with€Mr.€Summers€in€that€she€did€not€wantÏto€have€to€be€responsible€for€Joseph.€Emily€denied€any€such€statements€to,€orÏconversations€with,€Jessica.ÌÌà  àThere€was€testimony€from€Josephððs€day€care€teacher€that€Joseph€and€Mr.€SummersÏhad€a€good€relationship€and€that€Joseph€always€wanted€to€give€his€dad€a€hug.€LindaÏSummers,€sister„in„law€of€Mr.€Summers,€testified€that€in€her€opinion€it€would€be€in€JosephððsÏbest€interest€to€be€with€his€father.€It€was€her€opinion€that€Mr.€Summers€had€pretty€muchÏraised€the€child€and€was€always€there€for€Joseph€and€had€made€accommodations€for€theÏchild.€She€testified€that€she€and€her€husband€were€willing€to€watch€Joseph€at€Mr.€SummersÏhome€on€those€occasions€when€he€might€be€called€into€work€at€night.Ìà  àCindy€Summers,€sister€of€Mr.€Summers,€testified€that€she€is€a€teacher€at€BethelÏCollege,€where€she€teaches€sociology€and€has€a€degree€in€education€with€preschool€andÏelementary€certification,€with€a€graduate€degree€in€social€work.€She€testified€that€when€Mr.ÏSummers€and€his€son€Joseph€are€together€that€Joseph€is€calm,€that€he€listens,€that€heÏinteracts€well€with€the€people€he€is€with,€that€he€shares€and€is€calm€and€peaceful,€and€isÐ Ì84: Ðvery€pleasant€to€be€around.€She€also€testified€that€in€her€observations€of€Joseph€when€heÏis€around€his€mother,€Joseph€would€scream€and€be€very€loud,€unsettled€and€attentionÏseeking€with€a€lot€of€acting€out€behaviors.€She€testified€that€Mr.€Summers€had€beenÏJosephððs€caretaker€all€of€Josephððs€life€and€that€Mr.€Summers€also€raised€Mrs.€SummersððÏother€two€children.€She€indicated€the€child€would€be€better€off€with€Mr.€Summers€in€that€heÏwas€the€stabilizer€and€is€a€very€positive€force€in€the€childððs€life€and€puts€the€child€first.ÌÌà  àTerry€King,€sister€of€Mrs.€Summers,€testified€that€the€parties€took€care€of€Joseph€50„¼50.€She€testified€that€Mrs.€Summers€is€a€good€and€responsible€mother,€that€Mrs.€SummersÏloves€Joseph€dearly,€and€that€she€and€Joseph€have€a€very€good€relationship.€ÌÌà  àDorothy€Coleman,€mother€of€Mrs.€Summers,€testified€that€Joseph€interacts€with€hisÏmother,€brother€and€sister€and€is€very€happy€with€them.€She€testified€that€he€receives€loveÏand€affection€and€that€he€is€also€disciplined€and€is€being€taught€the€difference€betweenÏright€and€wrong.€€ÌÌà  àThere€was€also€testimony€of€the€work€schedules€and€work€commitments€of€bothÏHusband€and€Wife.€Husband€works€as€a€mortician€at€a€funeral€home.€His€jobÏresponsibilities€include€picking€up€bodies€from€the€local€hospitals€and€embalming€them€atÏthe€funeral€home.€During€the€marriage€he€was€frequently€ð ðon€callðð€and€therefore€could€beÏcalled€away€on€work€at€any€time€of€the€night.€Mr.€Summers€testified€that€if€he€was€awardedÏcustody€of€Joseph,€his€work€schedule€would€change€so€that€he€would€only€be€on€call€oneÏnight€each€week€and€on€alternating€weekends.€He€also€testified€that€his€brother€and€hisÏbrotherððs€wife€would€watch€Joseph€at€his€home€for€any€hours€that€he€was€called€away€forÏwork€so€that€his€son€would€not€have€to€be€awakened€from€his€sleep.€He€testified€that€if€heÏwas€awarded€custody€of€Joseph,€there€would€not€really€be€any€change€in€his€sonððsÏschedule.ÌÌà  àThere€was€much€testimony€on€the€business€trips€which€were€taken€by€Mrs.ÏSummers.€Mrs.€Summers€testified€that€she€will€not€be€traveling€for€business€in€the€future.Ð Ì84: ÐKathy€Mann,€work€supervisor€of€Mrs.€Summers,€testified€that€overnight€stays€at€some€ofÏthe€stores€were€necessary€and€that€it€is€a€continuing€part€of€Mrs.€Summersðð€job€and€she€willÏbe€required€to€do€that€in€the€future.€She€later€testified€that€another€employee€will€be€the€oneÏnormally€going€on€the€trips€to€the€outlet€stores,€but€Mrs.€Summers€will€have€to€go€if€it€isÏinvolved€with€the€plant€and€Ms.€Mann€is€unable€to€go.€There€was€testimony€that€Mrs.ÏSummers€would€attend€a€seminar€or€conference€once€a€year.€Mrs.€Summers€may€alsoÏhave€to€go€to€Mexico€for€a€week€to€train€the€employees€there.ÌÌà  àIn€the€Memorandum€Opinion,€the€trial€court€held€there€was€sufficient€evidence€toÏgrant€a€divorce€to€both€parties.€On€the€custody€issue,€the€trial€court€noted€that€both€parentsÏhave€contributed€significantly€to€the€rearing€and€upbringing€of€their€son.€The€trial€court€alsoÏnoted€that€it€is€apparent€that€both€parents€love€their€son€very€much€and€have€developedÏa€positive€relationship€with€him.€The€trial€court€stated€that€both€parents€are€suitable€andÏproper€parents€to€have€custody€of€their€child.€The€court€then€found€that€Mr.€Summers€mayÏbe€in€a€position€to€provide€a€more€stable€home€environment€in€the€future€and€for€remainingÏin€the€area€with€family€members€considering€his€type€of€employment€as€compared€to€Mrs.ÏSummers,€primarily€due€to€her€travel€requirements€and€relocation€possibilities.€The€trialÏcourt€awarded€custody€to€Mr.€Summers€with€Mrs.€Summers€being€allowed€liberal€visitation.ÌÌà  àThe€marital€residence€consists€of€a€house€and€a€128„acre€farm.€Mr.€Summers€gaveÏhis€opinion€that€the€fair€market€value€of€the€property€was€$115,000.€He€testified€that€thisÏvalue€was€a€higher€value€than€the€value€placed€upon€the€home€for€tax€purposes,€and€thatÏhe€considered€the€price€that€others€had€indicated€they€would€be€willing€to€pay€for€theÏproperty.€€Mrs.€Summers€wished€to€put€on€appraisal€testimony€that€the€house€was€worthÏ$144,000.€However,€the€Chancellor€had€told€the€attorneys€to€put€on€all€their€proof€as€itÏrelated€to€the€property€issues€at€the€February€1997€phase€of€the€trial€and€would€not€allowÏthis€appraisal€testimony€at€the€later€hearing€date.€Mrs.€Summers€then€testified€that€theÏproperty€was€worth€$144,000€in€her€opinion.€The€trial€court€valued€the€property€atÏ$130,000,€awarded€the€marital€residence€to€Mr.€Summers€and€ordered€that€he€pay€Mrs.ÏSummers€her€half€interest€in€the€equity€within€sixty€(60)€days€from€entry€of€the€judgment.Ð Ì84: Їà  àThere€was€also€testimony€in€the€case€regarding€child€support€due€to€Mrs.€SummersÏfrom€her€previous€Husband€for€the€support€of€Mrs.€Summers€two€children,€Dustin€andÏEmily.€There€was€a€child€support€order€which€required€the€father€of€these€children€to€payÏthe€sum€of€$200.00€per€month€as€support.€He€did€not€make€any€payments€during€theÏcourse€of€this€marriage€between€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Summers.€There€was€testimony€that€Mr.ÏSummers€supported€them€financially€and€assisted€in€their€rearing€as€a€father€would€do.€TheÏtrial€court€awarded€Mr.€Summers€a€lien€on€one€half€of€any€future€recovery€of€this€past€dueÏchild€support€by€Mrs.€Summers.Ìà  àThis€appeal€by€Mrs.€Summers€followed.ÌÌò òòòà@%ìàII.€DivorceˆÐ ¨ø Ðóóó óÌà  àFindings€of€facts€are€reviewed€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€WifeÐ Lœ Ðcontends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€the€divorce€solely€to€her.€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€ðð36„4„129(b)€gives€the€Chancellor€authority€to€grant€the€divorce€to€bothÏparties€if€upon€the€proof€both€parties€are€entitled€to€a€divorce.€Every€intendment€is€in€favorÏof€the€correctness€of€the€decree€of€the€trial€court.€òòFarrar€v.€Farraróó,€553€S.W.2d€741,€743Ð €!Ð  Ð(Tenn.€1977).ÌÌà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€there€was€insufficient€evidence€presented€for€the€court€toÏconclude€that€Mrs.€Summers€was€not€faithful.€However,€the€trial€court€found€thatÏcircumstances€existed€which€would€have€justified€Mr.€Summers€questioning€the€fidelity€ofÏhis€wife.€The€Court€then€stated€that€Mr.€Summers€was€not€understanding€of€the€nature€ofÏhis€wifeððs€job€which€necessitated€frequent€travel.€Mr.€Summers€made€accusations€aboutÏhis€wifeððs€conduct€which€often€were€not€based€on€fact.€The€trial€court€found€that€bothÏparties€contributed€to€the€dissolution€to€the€extent€that€both€should€be€granted€the€divorce.ÌÌà  àThere€was€testimony€that€Wife€took€several€overnight€trips€without€Husband.ÏHusband€was€never€invited€along€on€these€trips.€There€was€testimony€that€Wife€drank€andÏwent€out€to€dance€clubs€during€some€of€these€overnight€trips.€Wife€returned€from€oneÐ Ü8,4: Ðovernight€trip€with€a€bruise€on€her€neck€that€resembled€a€ð ðhickey.ðð€Husband€testified€thatÏWife€would€act€differently€toward€him€upon€her€return€from€these€trips.€There€wasÏtestimony€that€rumors€were€circulating€at€Wifeððs€job€regarding€Wife€and€a€co„worker.ÏSexual€relations€between€the€parties€became€almost€nonexistent,€and€Wife€frequently€didÏnot€sleep€in€the€same€bed€as€Husband.€There€was€testimony€that€Wife€frequented€dragÏracing€events,€where€Husband€stated€she€would€wear€tight€tops€and€tight€shorts€which€heÏthought€were€inappropriate€attire.ÌÌà  àWhile€there€was€no€direct€proof€that€Wife€was€unfaithful,€there€was€equallyÏinsufficient€evidence€to€conclude€that€she€was€not€unfaithful.€The€trial€judge€in€this€caseÏhad€to€base€his€judgment€and€findings€upon€oral€testimony.€The€trial€judge€thus€had€toÏassess€the€credibility€of€the€parties.€While€many€of€the€facts€in€this€case€were€disputed€byÏthe€parties,€such€findings€on€review€must€be€regarded€as€conclusive€unless€other€realÏevidence€compels€a€contrary€conclusion.€òòMcReynolds€v.€Cherokee€Ins.€Co.óó,€815€S.W.2dÐ  \ Ð208,€210€(Tenn.€App.€1991);€òòAirline€Constr.,€Inc.€v.€Barróó,€807€S.W.2d€247,€264€(Tenn.€App.Ð Ø( Ð1990).€The€trial€court€found€that€circumstances€existed€which€would€have€justified€Mr.ÏSummersðð€questioning€the€fidelity€of€his€wife.€We€hold€that€the€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€against€this€finding€and€the€Trial€Court€did€not€err€in€granting€a€divorce€toÏboth€parties.€€ÌÌò òòòà@ûûìàIII.€Custody€of€Minor€Child€ˆÐ  (ð#( ÐÌóóó óà  àThe€parties€have€a€son€who€was€near€age€five€at€the€time€of€the€divorce.€The€trialÐ P, ', Ðcourt€awarded€custody€to€Husband.€Wife€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€thisÏdetermination€of€custody.ÌÌà  àIn€child€custody€cases,€appellate€review€is€de€novo€upon€the€record,€with€aÏpresumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€factual€findings.€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòHassÐ L5œ06 Ðv.€Knightonóó,€676€S.W.2d€554,€555€(Tenn.€1984).€The€paramount€concern€in€child€custodyÐ 7h28 Ðcases€is€the€welfare€and€best€interest€of€the€child.€òòBah€v.€Bahóó,€668€S.W.2d€663€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ä844: ÐApp.€1983).€The€goal€of€every€custody€proceeding€is€to€place€the€child€in€an€environmentÏthat€will€best€serve€his€or€her€physical€and€emotional€needs.€òòLentz€v.€Lentzóó,€717€S.W.2dÐ |Ì Ð876,€877€(Tenn.€1986).€In€determining€where€the€best€interest€of€the€child€lies€whenÏawarding€custody,€the€court€considers€many€factors.€A€nonexclusive€list€of€such€factors€canÏbe€found€in€òòBah€v.€Bahóó€at€666.€Ð à 0 ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓTo€arrive€at€the€point€of€deciding€with€whom€to€place€a€child€inÏpreparation€for€a€caring€and€productive€adult€life€requiresÏconsideration€of€many€relevant€factors,€including€but€certainlyÏnot€limited€to€the€age,€habits,€mental€and€emotional€make„upÏof€the€child€and€those€parties€competing€for€custody;€theÏeducation€and€experience€of€those€seeking€to€raise€the€child;Ïtheir€character€and€propensities€as€evidenced€by€their€pastÏconduct;€the€financial€and€physical€circumstances€available€inÏthe€home€of€each€party€seeking€custody€and€the€specialÏrequirements€of€the€child;€the€availability€and€extent€of€thirdÏparty€support;€the€associations€and€influences€to€which€theÏchild€is€most€likely€to€be€exposed€in€the€alternatives€afforded,Ïboth€positive€and€negative;€and€where€is€the€greater€likelihoodÏof€an€environment€for€the€child€of€love,€warmth,€stability,Ïsupport,€consistency,€care€and€concern,€and€physical€andÏspiritual€nurture.ÌÌÓý]ÓÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àAs€a€general€rule€it€is€not€good€to€separate€minor€children.€òòTerry€v.€Terryóó,€361Ð òB ÐS.W.2d€500,€504€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1960).€In€the€case€at€hand,€Husband€was€awardedÏcustody€of€the€partiesðð€five€year€old€son.€Wife€had€two€children€by€a€previous€marriage€thatÏremained€in€her€custody.€The€children,€a€girl€and€a€boy,€were€ages€15€and€18€respectivelyÏat€the€time€of€the€divorce.€The€trial€court€cited€a€case€in€which€the€court€held€that€whereÏchildren€were€of€different€sexes,€and€where€there€was€an€age€difference€of€six€(6)€years,Ïit€was€not€as€important€for€the€two€children€to€remain€together€in€the€same€custodialÏdomicile€as€it€would€have€been€if€they€were€much€closer€in€age€and€were€of€the€same€sex.Ð †)Ö$) ÐòòCease€v.€Ceaseóó,€Slip€Opinion,€(Ct.€App.€M.S.,€Nov.€1981).€Ð R+¢&+ ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€of€òòDodd€v.€Doddóó,€737€S.W.2d€286€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987),€the€parties€hadÐ ê.:*/ Ðthree€minor€children€and€the€court€awarded€custody€of€one€daughter€to€the€Husband€andÏthe€other€two€daughters€to€the€Wife.€The€Guardian€Ad€Litem€was€of€the€opinion€that€theÏyounger€two€sisters€were€closer€to€each€other€than€to€the€older€sister.€While€theirÏrespective€ages€were€not€mentioned,€the€GAL€commented€that€ð ðconsidering€theÏcomparative€ages€of€the€children,€this€is€understandable.ðð€òòIdóó.€at€291.€The€court€in€òòDoddóóÐ æ7639 Ðstated€that€it€must€consider€the€welfare€and€best€interests€of€these€children€as€individuals,Ð ²95; Ðnot€as€a€group€of€three.€òòIdóó.€The€court€found€that€while€both€parents€were€fit€parents,€it€wasÐ ° Ðin€the€best€interest€of€the€eldest€child€to€be€placed€in€the€custody€of€her€father.€The€courtÏfound€that€the€younger€two€daughters,€being€closer€in€age,€enjoy€a€close€relationship,€andÏshould€be€kept€together€in€the€custody€of€the€mother.€òòIdóó.Ð  d ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€at€hand,€the€partiesðð€son€is€age€five€and€his€half„sister€is€age€15.€ThereÏwas€testimony,€although€disputed,€that€the€half„sister€Emily,€while€loving€her€half„brother,Ïdid€not€want€to€have€to€be€responsible€for€him.€There€was€testimony€from€Emily€that€sheÏfelt€comfortable€in€calling€Mr.€Summers€if€she€needed€anything€and€that€she€would€feelÏcomfortable€going€to€his€house€to€visit€with€the€minor€child€Joseph.ÌÌà  àWife€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€considered,€in€the€case€of€thisÏchild€of€tender€years,€the€gender€of€the€parent,€namely,€the€mother,€as€a€factor€inÏdetermining€custody€of€the€child.€At€the€time€this€case€was€heard,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ðð36„6„¼101(d)€read€as€follows:ÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓIt€is€the€legislative€intent€that€the€gender€of€the€party€seekingÏcustody€shall€not€give€rise€to€a€presumption€of€parental€fitnessÏor€cause€a€presumption€in€favor€or€against€the€award€ofÏcustody€to€such€party;€provided,€that€in€the€case€of€a€child€ofÏtender€years,€the€gender€of€the€parent€may€be€considered€byÏthe€court€as€a€factor€in€determining€custody€after€anÏexamination€of€the€fitness€of€each€party€seeking€custody.€ÌÌÒ°` flÒÒ°` XlÒÓtlÓIn€July€of€1997,€the€statute€was€amended€inserting€the€language€ð ðor€constitute€a€factorðð€andÏdeleting€any€reference€to€the€former€language€constituting€the€ð ðtender€years€doctrineðð€thusÏeliminating€any€gender„based€preference.€However,€even€under€the€Statute€as€it€read€atÏthe€time€of€trial,€no€presumption€of€parental€fitness€existed€in€favor€of€the€mother.€ThereÏis€no€evidence€in€the€record€that€the€trial€court€did€or€did€not€consider€tender€years€as€aÏfactor€in€making€its€determination.€However,€the€statute€reads€that€such€a€factor€òòmayóó€beÐ Ð/ +0 Ðconsidered€by€the€court.€Therefore,€even€if€the€trial€court€did€not€choose€to€consider€thisÏas€a€factor,€this€Court€finds€no€error€with€such€action.ÌÌà  àThe€various€factors€to€consider€in€custody€decisions€are€set€out€in€Tenn.Code€Ann.Ïðð36„6„106.€After€applying€the€factors€to€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€was€unable€toÐ Ð8 4: Ðascertain€any€real€distinctions€between€the€parties€as€relates€to€their€parenting€abilities€andÏthe€best€interest€of€the€child.€The€trial€court€did€find€that€during€the€course€of€the€marriageÏthat€Mr.€Summers€had€to€assume€more€individual€responsibility€for€his€son€and€step„¼children€on€various€occasions€due€to€business€and€personal€trips€taken€by€Mrs.€SummersÏand€that€he€was€a€competent€parent€during€these€times.€The€trial€court€then€stated€that€Mr.ÏSummers€may€be€in€a€position€to€provide€a€more€stable€home€environment€in€the€futureÏand€for€remaining€in€the€area€with€family€members€considering€his€type€of€employment€asÏcompared€to€Mrs.€Summers,€primarily€due€to€her€travel€requirements€and€relocationÏpossibilities.€The€trial€court€ultimately€awarded€custody€to€Mr.€Summers.ÌÌà  àThe€factual€findings€of€the€trial€court€are€entitled€to€a€presumption€of€correctness.ÏTrial€Courts€are€vested€with€wide€discretion€in€matters€of€child€custody€and€the€appellateÏcourts€will€not€interfere€except€upon€a€showing€of€erroneous€exercise€of€that€discretion.ÏòòKoch€v.€Kochóó,€874€S.W.2d€571€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€There€were€many€disputed€facts€inÐ  \ Ðthis€case€which€called€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€into€account.€Based€upon€theÏforegoing€standards€of€review,€and€upon€careful€consideration€of€the€record,€this€CourtÏfinds€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€and€affirmsÏthe€award€of€custody€to€Husband.à À à€Ð <#Œ" ÐÌ€ò òòòà@ ìàIV.€Marital€Residenceóóó óˆÐ Ô&$"& ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€awarded€the€real€property€to€Husband€and€ordered€him€to€pay€to€WifeÏher€one€half€interest€in€the€equity€within€sixty€(60)€days€from€the€entry€of€the€judgment.€WifeÏargues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€ordered€the€property€sold€or,€alternatively,€valuedÏthe€property€at€$144,000.00.ÌÌà  àProperty€division€is€reviewed€de€novo€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€AllowingÏthe€party€granted€custody€to€remain€in€the€marital€residence€is€common€in€propertyÏdivisions.€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð36„4„121(d)€states,€ð ðThe€court€may€award€theÏfamily€home€and€household€effects,€or€the€right€to€live€therein€and€use€the€householdÐ Ø8(4: Ðeffects€for€a€reasonable€period,€to€either€party,òò€but€shall€give€special€consideration€to€aÐ ° Ðspouse€having€physical€custody€of€a€child€or€children€of€the€marriageóó.ðð€As€this€Court€hasÐ €Ð Ðaffirmed€the€award€of€custody€of€the€minor€child€to€Husband,€this€Court€also€affirms€the€trialÏcourtððs€holding€allowing€Husband€to€retain€the€marital€residence.ÌÌà  àThe€trial€court€found€the€value€of€the€real€property€to€be€the€sum€of€$130,000.00.ÏThe€Husband€testified€that€in€his€opinion€the€real€property€was€worth€$115,000.00.€WifeÏtestified€that€the€real€property€was€worth€$144,000.00.€The€trial€judge€apparently€split€theÏdifference€to€arrive€at€the€value€of€$130,000.00.€Wife€argues€that€the€testimony€of€theÏappraiser€should€have€been€allowed€to€establish€the€value€at€$144,000.00.ÌÌà  àThis€case€was€tried€to€the€judge€on€several€different€dates.€At€the€hearing€on€MarchÏ19,€1997,€Wife€tried€to€offer€into€evidence€the€appraisal€which€was€done€on€the€house.ÏHusbandððs€attorney€objected€on€the€grounds€that€this€matter€should€have€been€discussedÏat€the€previous€hearing€(February€1997),€and€it€was€agreed€and€understood€that€only€theÏparties€and€possibly€Mr.€Drewry€would€be€testifying€at€the€present€hearing.€The€trial€judgeÏstated€the€following:ÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓIððve€already€indicated€to€you€all€by€phone€conference,€and€weÏcan€address€it€later,€and€Iððll€state€it€for€the€record€now„„€that€IÏtold€you€all€then€to€put€on€all€your€proof€as€relates€to€theÏproperty€issues,€and€it€was€clearly€understood€that€I€was€goingÏto€continue€the€matter€today€for€matters€of€custody€andÏtestimony€between€the€parties€as€relates€to€property€and€„„€andÏthen€to,€as€Iððve€indicated€to€you,€to€come€in€after€the€fact€nowÏand€start€wanting€to€have€appraisals€or€other€testimony,€in€myÏopinion,€is€not€an€appropriate€procedure,€and€Iððve€alreadyÏindicated€that€to€you€by€phone€and€Iððm€not€going€to€allow€theÏappraisal€today€for€the€purposes€of€this€hearing.€Not€that€IððdÏconsider€the€appraisal€„„€I€donððt€even€know€what€it€is.€Itððs€just€aÏmatter€as€I€indicated€to€you,€Mr.€Jones€and€Mr.€West,€a€matterÏprocedurally€that€was€not€the€understanding€that€we€had.€AndÏthere€was€no€just€cause€given€to€the€Court€as€to€why€it€couldÏnot€have€been€done€prior€to€the€last€hearing€when€the€matterÏwas€set€for€trial.€And€had€there€been€some€reason€given,€theÏCourt€certainly€might€have€considered€it.€But€as€I€recall,€thereÏwas€no€reason€given.€And€again,€I€emphasize€that€when€I€setÏa€case€for€trial,€I€expect€it€to€be€ready€to€go€for€trial€as€far€as€allÏelements€of€proof€are€concerned€and€not€be€taking€testimonyÏand€„„€after€the€trial€has€started€under€these€circumstances.ÌÌÌÒ°` €ÒÒ°` €ÒÓ.€Óà  àOne€of€the€most€important€functions€of€a€trial€judge€is€to€control€the€admission€of€theÐ Ô8$4: Ðevidence.€€Trial€judges€have€broad€discretion€over€the€admissibility€of€evidence,€€òòOtis€v.Ð ° ÐCambridge€Mut.€Fire€Ins.€Co.óó,€850€S.W.2d€439,€442€(Tenn.1992);€òòWitter€v.€Nesbitóó,€878Ð |Ì ÐS.W.2d€116,€122€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.1993),€and€the€order€of€the€proof.€òòMorris€v.€Swaneyóó,€54Ð H˜ ÐTenn.€€(7€Heisk.)€591,€595€(1872);€€òòLong€v.€Tomlinóó,€22€œTenn.€ñ% ñ›ñ% ñAppñ% ññ# ñ›ñ# ññ% ñ.€607,€623,€125€S.W.2dÐ  d Ð171,€181€ñ% ñœñ% ñ(1938).€Theñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€matter€of€establishing€the€order€of€proof€is€within€the€Trial€Court'sÏsound€discretion€and€will€be€reversed€only€when€the€trial€judge€has€abused€that€discretionÏand€where€it€ñ% ñœñ% ñcan€beñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€demonstrated€that€the€error€has€affected€the€substantial€rights€of€oneÏor€both€parties.€€Tenn.€R.€ñ% ñœñ% ñEvidñ% ñ›ñ% ñ.€103(a);€òòCastelli€v.€Lienóó,€910€S.W.2d€420€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð D”  ÐApp.1995);€€€òòBowers€v.€Bowersóó,€€956€S.W.2d€496,€499€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€ñ% ñœñ% ñ1997).Ð ` Ðñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àBoth€parties€were€given€the€opportunity€to€present€evidence€on€the€value€of€theÏhome€at€the€February€5,€1997€hearing€in€this€matter.€Both€parties€were€aware€that€theÏmatter€was€set€for€trial€on€February€5,€1997€and€both€parties€called€witnesses€at€thisÏhearing.€Neither€party€had€an€appraisal€as€of€the€February€trial€ñ% ñœñ% ñdate.ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€The€trial€lasted€longerÏthan€one€day€and€the€Judge€expressed€that€the€next€hearing€would€be€for€the€purpose€ofÏhearing€testimony€from€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñparties.ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€The€trial€judge€stated€that€had€just€cause€been€givenÏto€the€Court€as€to€why€the€appraisal€could€not€have€been€done€prior€to€the€last€hearingÏwhen€the€matter€was€set€for€trial,€he€certainly€might€have€allowed€the€testimony.€However,Ïno€reason€was€given€by€ñ% ñœñ% ñWife.ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€Both€parties€put€on€evidence€as€to€their€opinion€of€the€valueÏof€the€property.€This€Court€finds€that€the€trial€judge€did€not€abuse€his€discretion€and€theÏvalue€of€the€property€shall€stand€at€ñ% ñœñ% ñ$130,000.00.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àWife€argues€that€the€farm€has€lost€money€over€the€past€three€years€and€that€theÏproperty€should€be€sold€at€auction,€where€it€would€bring€a€fair€market€price.€Wife€testifiedÏthat€according€to€the€partiesðð€income€tax€returns,€the€property€had€lost€ñ% ñœñ% ñmore€thanñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€twentyÏthousand€dollars€over€three€years.€ñ% ñœñ% ñ€Onñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€cross€examination,€it€was€brought€out€that€the€farmÏloss€as€reflected€on€the€partiesðð€income€tax€returns€may€have€been€the€product€ofÏdepreciation€and€other€allowable€deductions.€ñ% ñœñ% ñ€However,ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€as€this€Court€has€affirmed€theÏvalue€placed€upon€the€property€by€the€trial€court,€the€issue€of€whether€the€farm€is€losingÏmoney€is€largely€irrelevant.€The€trial€court€valued€the€property€at€$130,000.00,€subtractedÐ Ì84: Ðthe€debt€on€the€property€of€$28,000.00€and€found€the€net€equity€to€be€$102,000.00.€€TheÏtrial€court€ordered€the€Husband€to€pay€to€the€Wife€her€one€half€interest€($51,000.00)€in€theÏproperty.€Therefore,€Wife€will€receive€her€one€ñ% ñœñ% ñhalf€interestñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€in€the€property€as€it€was€valuedÏat€the€time€of€divorce.€Whether€the€farm€loses€money€or€gains€money€in€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñfutureñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€has€noÏbearing€upon€the€amount€awarded€to€Wife.€ñ% ñœñ% ñÌñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àThis€Court€affirms€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€awarding€the€marital€residence€toÏHusband,€with€payment€owing€to€ñ% ñœñ% ñWifeñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€of€her€one€half€interest€in€the€property.€This€CourtÏfurther€affirms€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€as€they€relate€to€the€value€of€the€maritalÏresidence.Ìòòò òÌà@ìì*ìàñ% ñœñ% ñˆÌÌÌà@  ìàV.€€Lienñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€on€Future€Child€Support€RecoveryˆÌÌà  àóóó óDuring€the€marriage€Husband€helped€provide€for€the€support€of€the€two€minorÐ ¸!  Ðchildren€of€Wife€by€a€former€marriage.€This€fact€was€not€disputed€at€trial.€The€formerÏhusband€of€Wife€failed€to€pay€any€child€support€to€her€during€the€course€of€the€partiesððÏmarriage€and€an€arrearage€accumulated€during€the€marriage€in€the€amount€of€$28,000.00.Ïñ% ñœñ% ñTheñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€trial€court€awarded€ñ% ñœñ% ñHusbandñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€a€lien€on€one„half€of€any€future€recovery€ñ% ñœñ% ñof€thisñ% ñ›ñ% ñÏ$28,000.00€by€ñ% ñœñ% ñWife.ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€Wife€alleges€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€this€award€and€that€suchÏaward€would€grant€a€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepparentñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€a€windfall€profit€by€taking€support€away€from€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepchildrenñ% ñ›ñ% ñÏin€case€the€relationship€ñ% ñœñ% ñsours.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àHusband€testified€that€he€voluntarily€provided€love€and€support€to€his€step„children.ÏHe€asserts€that€Wife€would€be€granted€a€windfall€profit€if€she€ñ% ñœñ% ñwereñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€allowed€to€collectÏsupport€in€its€entirety€for€the€twelve„year€period€in€which€Husband€had€supported€the€familyÏin€whole€or€in€part.€Husband€maintains€that€this€asset€should€remain€equally€divided€amongÏthe€ñ% ñœñ% ñparties.Ð 9d4: Ðñ% ñ›ñ% ñ‡à  àThe€trial€court€stated€that€Mrs.€Summersðð€prior€divorce€judgment€with€her€formerÏhusband€and€father€of€her€two€children€was€and€is€an€executable€and€enforceableÏjudgment€for€child€support.€The€trial€judge€cited€òòRedmond€v.€Grunowóó,€898€S.W.2d€229,€231Ð H˜ Ð(Tenn.€1995)€which€supports€that€conclusion.€The€trial€court€held€that€the€arrearageÏaccumulated€during€the€marriage€of€Husband€and€Wife€is€deemed€to€be€an€asset€in€theÏform€of€a€judgment€acquired€by€ñ% ñœñ% ñWifeñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€during€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñmarriage.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àThis€appears€to€be€a€case€of€first€impression€in€Tennessee.€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€ðð36„5„101€states€in€pertinent€part:ÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓ(a)€(5)€Any€order€for€child€support€shall€be€a€judgment€entitledÏto€be€enforced€as€any€other€judgment€of€a€court€of€this€stateÏand€shall€be€entitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€in€this€state€and€inÏany€other€state.€Such€judgment€shall€not€be€subject€toÏmodification€as€to€any€time€period€or€any€amounts€due€prior€toÏthe€date€that€an€action€for€modification€is€filed€and€notice€of€theÏaction€has€been€mailed€to€the€last€known€address€of€theÏopposing€parties.€òòIf€the€full€amount€of€child€support€is€not€paidÐ &v Ðby€the€date€upon€which€the€ordered€support€is€due,€the€unpaidÏamount€is€in€arrears€and€shall€become€a€judgment€for€theÏunpaid€amountsóó€and€shall€accrue€interest€from€the€date€of€theÐ Þ. Ðarrearage€at€the€rate€of€twelve€percent€(12%)€per€annum.€AllÏinterest€which€accumulates€on€ñ% ñœñ% ñarrearagesñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€shall€be€consideredÏchild€support.€Computation€of€interest€shall€not€be€theÏresponsibility€of€the€clerk.ÌÌÓÓÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒThus,€when€support€is€not€paid€by€the€date€it€is€due,€it€is€automatically€converted€into€aÏjudgment€for€such€arrearage€by€operation€of€ñ% ñœñ% ñlaw.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àThe€judgment€in€ñ% ñœñ% ñWifeððsñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€prior€divorce€ordered€the€father€of€the€children€to€pay€theÏsum€of€$200€per€month€as€child€support.€Each€month€that€support€was€not€paid€by€theÏfather€of€the€children,€the€amount€of€arrears€became€an€enforceable€judgment.€The€partiesÏwere€married€while€this€arrearage€accrued€and€the€judgments€became€enforceable.ÏTherefore,€such€arrearage€was€an€asset€in€the€form€of€a€judgment€acquired€by€ñ% ñœñ% ñWifeñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€duringÏthe€ñ% ñœñ% ñmarriage.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àThis€Court€is€mindful€that€child€support€is€for€the€primary€purpose€of€supporting€theÏchild.€However,€the€award€of€the€trial€court€does€not€take€present€or€future€support€awayÏfrom€the€two€children.€The€award€is€designed€to€reimburse€Husband€for€past€support€of€theÐ Ô8$4: Ðchildren€in€the€event€there€is€a€recovery€of€such€support.€There€was€evidence€presentedÏthat€Husband€stepped€in€and€took€the€place€of€the€father€of€these€children€and€providedÏthe€support€which€was€not€forthcoming€from€the€father.€The€trial€court€awarded€FatherÏreimbursement€of€that€support€only€in€the€event€that€Wife€recovers€such€support€from€theÏfather€of€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñchildren.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àIn€the€case€of€òòHoyle€v.€Wilsonóó,€746€S.W.2d€665€(Tenn.€1988)€the€TennesseeÐ xÈ  ÐSupreme€Court€stated€that€the€child€support€obligee€does€not€have€to€show€that€arrearagesÏwould€be€used€for€the€benefit€of€the€children.€The€Court€reaffirmed€the€existing€law€that€noÏsuch€showing€is€ordinarily€required€because€enforcement€of€arrearages€constitutes€a€formÏof€reimbursement€for€the€obligeeððs€assumption€of€the€entire€duty€of€support€during€theÏperiod€covered€by€the€arrearages.€òòIdóó.€at€677.€€In€the€case€at€hand,€Husband€and€WifeÐ tÄ Ðassumed€the€entire€duty€of€support€of€Wifeððs€two€minor€children€throughout€the€durationÏof€their€marriage.€Both€parties€are€equally€entitled€to€reimbursement€for€their€assumptionÏof€such€duty€if€there€is€a€recovery€of€such€ñ% ñœñ% ñarrearage.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àIn€the€case€at€hand€there€was€uncontroverted€evidence€that€Husband€supported€theÏchildren€of€the€Wife€during€the€marriage€and€that€ñ% ñœñ% ñtheñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€children€did€not€lead€a€lesser€lifestyleÏdue€to€the€non„support€of€the€father.€If€this€were€a€case€where€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepparentñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€did€notÏprovide€adequate€support€to€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepchildrenñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€or€the€support€provided€by€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepparentñ% ñ›ñ% ñÏwas€not€comparable€to€the€support€which€was€due€by€the€obligor€parent,€the€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepparentñ% ñ›ñ% ñÏmight€not€be€so€entitled€to€share€in€the€recovery€of€arrearages.€This€Court€does€notÏaddress€that€issue.€Nor€does€this€Court€address€the€issue€of€whether€a€ñ% ñœñ% ñstepparentñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€wouldÏbe€entitled€to€maintain€his€ñ% ñœñ% ñor€her€ownñ% ñ›ñ% ñ€cause€of€action€against€the€obligor€parent€forÏrecovery€of€arrearages.€Those€issues€are€not€before€this€Court€at€this€time€and€weÏaccordingly€do€not€express€any€opinion€on€such€ñ% ñœñ% ñissues.Ìñ% ñ›ñ% ñÌà  àWe€hold€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€granting€Husband€a€lien€on€one„half€of€anyÏfuture€recovery€of€the€$28,000.00€recovered€by€Wife.ÌÐ Ì84: Ðò òòòà@ìì*ìàñ% ñœñ% ñˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@#ìàVI.€€Conclusionñ% ñ›ñ% ñˆÌóóó óÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€judgment€is€hereby€affirmed.€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€Wife,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€ñ% ñœñ% ñÌÌÓÓÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð !^ Ðóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àHIGHERS,€J.Ð ô!D  ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð $)t$( ÐóóCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.Ð  *Z%) ÐÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ¢-ò(- ÐFARMER,€J.ñ% ñ›ñ% ñ