ÿWPCš 8#  UN+ %y 0(w@§4çû  0l 0D~ 0@ 0J 0TLÆ ÆfÆ,Æò 0^¸ 0h 0r~ 0|ð 0†l 0ò 1u‚ 0d÷ B[ D3x U>« B)é AQÆc 0D) 0Dm D/± BàDCý AM@U*·5º¡ï¹v~IvÓǘHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ©£ª«¬Ó€¸Ó€ÄÅÆ‚ÇÈäzz!3|xÈ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52, 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 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d*+,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd((((7Border 1dd*/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ùÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€'ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌò òJune€24,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€1ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó +Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€'ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWifeððs€pretrial€affidavit€lists€their€sonððs€school€tuition€for€enrollment€in€the€9th€grade€atÏChristian€Brothers€High€School€at€$4,000€per€year€plus€an€additional€$200€for€textbooks.Ì —Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€'ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝUpon€motion,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€granting€a€stay€as€to€the€final€decree€pendingÏthe€outcome€of€this€appeal€with€certain€exceptions€to€include€Wifeððs€right€of€immediate€access€toÏone„half€of€Husbandððs€401K.€€The€court€entered€a€qualified€domestic€relations€order€to€this€effect.Ì ¯Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€'ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€amount€was€set€by€the€divorce€referee€as€temporary€support.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€'ÔÝ  Ýò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€JACKSONó óÌÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌà à)Ìò òDIANE€SLAWSON€WATTERSó ó,à à)à àShelby€County€Chancery€CourtÌœ›à à)à àNo.€23808„2€R.D.Ìœ›€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.A.€No.€02A01„9511„CH„00254̜ـ*ÙßR€02/A1-j|üe` Å `€€@ÿRß›à à)Ìò òWILLIAM€G.€WATTERS€andó óà à)Ìò òGENERAL€MILLS,€INC.ó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendants/Appellants.à à)Ìà à)ÌœÓÓ______________________________________________________________________________ÌÓÓFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Shelby€County€at€Memphis.Ìò òHonorable€Floyd€Peete,€Jr.,€Chancellor€ó óÌÌÌÌò òJames€D.€Causeyó ó,€Memphis,€TennesseeÌò òJean€E.€Markowitzó ó,€Memphis,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€Defendant/Appellant€William€G.€Watters.ÌÌÌò òDaniel€D.€Warlickó ó,€Nashville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÌà àò òFARMER,€J.ó óÌÌò òCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òLILLARD,€J.ó ó:€(Concurs)à@ àÌÌÌÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àThis€case€concerns€the€dissolution€of€the€fourteen€year€marriage€of€William€G.ÏWatters€(Husband)€and€Diane€Slawson€Watters€(Wife).€€Husband€has€appealed€from€the€finalÏdecree€alleging€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€classification€and€division€of€the€marital€estate,€award€ofÏalimony€and€calculation€of€child€support€and€in€certain€evidentiary€rulings.€€For€reasons€hereinafterÏstated,€we€affirm€as€modified.ÌÌà àThe€parties€were€married€in€July€1980.€€At€the€time€of€trial,€Husband€was€44€andÏWife€47.€€One€child€was€born€of€the€marriage,€a€son,€Stephen€Matthew,€age€13€at€the€time€of€trial.€ÏWife€has€two€adult€children€from€a€prior€marriage.€€During€the€marriage,€Wife€was€primarily€aÏhomemaker€and€student.€€She€discontinued€her€studies€after€their€son€was€born€and€until€he€beganÏschool€full„time.€€She€earned€a€masterððs€degree€in€psychology€in€May€1993.€€She€is€currentlyÏenrolled€at€the€University€of€Memphis€pursuing€her€doctorate€in€counseling€education€and€expectsÏto€graduate€in€August€1998.€€Husband€has€been€employed€at€General€Mills€for€23€years.€€HeÏcurrently€earns€a€net€base€salary€of€approximately€$4,890€per€month€plus€an€annual€bonus.€€WifeÏhas€a€family€history€of€breast€cancer€and€has€undergone€a€double€mastectomy.€€Husband€is€in€goodÏhealth.€€The€parties€separated€in€February€1993.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€awarded€the€divorce€to€Wife€on€stipulated€grounds€of€inappropriateÏmarital€conduct.€€Additionally,€the€court€awarded€the€marital€residence,€which€it€valued€atÏ$157,393,€to€Wife€and€its€accompanying€indebtedness€of€$97,245;€held€that€the€parties€hadÏpreviously€divided€the€marital€personalty;€gave€Wife€her€separate€property€totaling€$12,990€andÏHusband€his€separate€property€totaling€$3,915;€awarded€marital€property€to€Wife€totalingÏapproximately€$326,000€to€include€the€marital€residence,€the€General€Mills€Voluntary€InvestmentÏPlan€in€Husbandððs€name€(401K)€in€the€amount€of€$185,543€and€the€proceeds€less€capital€gains€taxÍfrom€the€exercise€of€certain€General€Mills€stock€options€in€the€amount€of€$47,960;€awardedÏHusband€marital€property€totaling€approximately€$247,000€to€include€certain€General€Millsðð€stockÏoptions€($75,593)€and€restricted€stock€options€($15,995)€and€his€pension€benefit€with€a€presentÏvalue€of€$139,423;€ordered€Wife€responsible€for€marital€debt€in€the€amount€of€$13,346€andÏHusband€responsible€in€the€amount€of€$12,545;€awarded€custody€of€the€minor€child€to€Wife;Ïordered€Husband€to€pay€$1,027€per€month€in€child€support€plus€21%€of€his€annual€bonus,€lessÏappropriate€deductions€for€income€taxes€and€social€security,€and€all€private€school€tuition€andÏexpenses;× ƒ3 ××  ×€ordered€Husband€to€maintain€medical€insurance€on€Wife€and€child€and€be€responsibleÏfor€50%€of€the€uncovered€medical€expenses;€ordered€Husband€to€pay€Wife€$1,900€per€month€inÏalimony€for€seven€years€or€until€her€death€or€remarriage;€ordered€Husband€to€pay€Wifeððs€attorneyððsÏfees€in€the€amount€of€$38,798.66;€and€ordered€Husband€to€maintain€a€$200,000€insurance€policyÏon€his€life€with€Wife€as€beneficiary€for€five€years€with€the€amount€of€coverage€to€then€dropÏ$20,000€per€year€for€two€years.× ƒ4 ××  ×ÌÌà àHusband€identifies€the€issues€for€review€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à1.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€evaluation,Ïclassification€and€inclusion€of€the€marital€property.ÌÌà8 àà à2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€the€division€of€the€maritalÏestate.ÌÌà8 àà à3.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€awards€of€alimony€toÏWife.ÌÌà8 àà à4.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€PicklerððsÏtestimony€regarding€Wifeððs€accumulation€of€funds€for€childððsÏcollege€education€and€Wifeððs€testimony€regarding€college€educationÍof€the€son€under€the€guise€of€lifestyle€of€the€parties.ÌÌà8 àà à5.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€admit€aÏsettlement€proposal€when€the€court€relied€on€the€refusal€to€respondÏto€said€proposal€in€awarding€attorney€fees.ÌÌà8 àà à6.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€disclosure€ofÏworking€notes€of€an€expert€and€erred€in€allowing€the€introduction€ofÏthose€documents€into€evidence.ÌÌà8 àà à7.€€Whether€the€trail€court€erred€in€allowing€the€introductionÏof€Wifeððs€ð ð[time€line]ðð€of€Husbandððs€misconduct€when€grounds€hadÏbeen€stipulated.ÌÌà8 àà à8.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ordering€the€formula€to€beÏused€in€determining€the€social€security€deduction€for€child€support€asÏto€Husbandððs€bonus.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àOur€review€of€this€case€is€pursuant€to€Rule€13(d)€T.R.A.P.,€which€provides€for€aÏòòò òde€novoóóó ó€review€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact,€accompanied€by€aÏpresumption€of€correctness,€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€As€our€divorce€statutesÏaddress€only€the€division€of€ð ðmaritalðð€property,€it€is€incumbent€upon€the€trial€court€to€first€classifyÏthe€partiesðð€property€as€either€separate€or€marital€before€making€an€equitable€division€of€the€maritalÏestate.€€òòò òWade€v.€Wadeóóó ó,€897€S.W.2d€702,€713€(Tenn.€App.€1994);€òòò òBatson€v.€Batsonóóó ó,€769ÏS.W.2d€849,€856€(Tenn.€App.€1988).€€Thus,€we€begin€with€consideration€of€Husbandððs€first€issueÏpertaining€to€the€trial€courtððs€classification€and€evaluation€of€the€coupleððs€property.€€ÌÌà àHusband€asserts€that€the€trial€courtððs€valuation€of€the€marital€residence€results€in€anÏaward€of€additional€equity€to€Wife€which€was€not€included€within€the€marital€estate.€€From€theÏrecord,€it€is€clear€that€numerous€testimonies€were€extended€regarding€the€value€of€the€marital€homeÏranging€from€approximately€$143,000€to€$175,000.€€Husband€submits€that€eight€opinionsÏregarding€value€were€proffered€with€the€trial€court€ð ðarbitrarilyðð€taking€five€and€averaging€them€toÏarrive€at€a€value.€€The€record€indicates€that€Wifeððs€Rule€15€affidavit€states€a€value€of€$144,800.€€AtÏtrial,€her€testimony€established€a€value€of€$143,000€or€ð ða€little€bit€more.ðð€€Husband€valued€theÏhome€in€his€affidavit€at€$167,000€and€$175,000€at€trial.€€Don€Ralph,€a€real€estate€appraiser,€valuedÍthe€home€as€of€December€7,€1994€at€$167,000.€€Ralph€also€testified€regarding€the€square€footageÏof€five€comparable€sales.€€Wife€submitted€an€exhibit€averaging€the€square€footage€comparables€toÏarrive€at€a€value€for€the€marital€residence€of€$155,365.€€The€final€decree€indicates€that€the€trial€judgeÏattributed€a€value€by€Husband€of€$175,000€and€$144,800€by€Wife.€€He€then€took€those€twoÏfigures,€Ralphððs€value€of€$167,000,€the€Shelby€County€Assessorððs€value€of€$144,800€and€theÏaverage€of€comparables€($155,365)€and€averaged€them€to€arrive€at€a€value€of€$157,393.ÌÌà àHusband€contends€that€the€method€utilized€by€the€trial€court€failed€to€consider€all€ofÏthe€evidence€presented€and€that€the€home€is€properly€valued€based€on€the€testimony€of€RalphÏwhose€appraisal€was€conducted€nearer€in€time€to€the€final€divorce€hearing€date.€€Husband€citesÏòòò òKoch€v.€Kochóóó ó,€874€S.W.2d€571€(Tenn.€App.€1993),€for€the€proposition€that€ð ð[m]arital€propertyÏis€to€be€evaluated€ððas€of€a€date€as€near€as€reasonably€possible€to€the€final€divorce€hearing€date.ðð€ððÏòòò òKochóóó ó,€874€S.W.2d€at€576€(quoting€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(1)(a)).€€òòò òKochóóó ó€further€states:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€value€of€a€marital€asset€is€determined€by€considering€allÏrelevant€evidence€regarding€value.€.€.€.€€€The€burden€is€on€the€partiesÏto€procure€competent€evidence€of€value,€and€the€parties€are€bound€byÏthe€evidence€they€present.€.€.€.€€Thus€the€trial€court,€in€its€discretion,Ïis€free€to€place€a€value€on€a€marital€asset€that€is€within€the€range€ofÏthe€evidence€submitted.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òKochóóó ó,€874€S.W.2d€at€577€(quoting€òòò òWallace€v.€Wallaceóóó ó,€733€S.W.2d€102,€107€(Tenn.€App.Ï1987))€(citations€omitted).ÌÌà àAs€the€valuation€of€an€asset€is€a€question€of€fact,€there€is€a€presumption€on€appealÏthat€the€trial€courtððs€valuation€is€correct.€€òòò òSmith€v.€Smithóóó ó,€912€S.W.2d€155,€157€(Tenn.€App.Ï1995).€Clearly,€the€record€reflects€that€the€value€placed€upon€the€marital€home€by€the€trial€court€isÏwithin€the€range€of€the€evidence€submitted.€€We€further€do€not€find€the€record€to€indicate€that€theÏtrial€court€failed€to€consider€all€relevant€evidence€when€making€its€decision.ÌÌà àHusband€next€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€evaluation€and€classification€ofÏthe€marital€personalty.€€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(1)(A)€defines€ð ðmarital€propertyðð€as€ÌÌÓÓà8 à[A]ll€real€and€personal€property,€both€tangible€and€intangible,Ïacquired€by€either€or€both€spouses€during€the€course€of€the€marriageÏup€to€the€date€of€the€final€divorce€hearing€and€owned€by€either€orÏboth€spouses€as€of€the€date€of€filing€of€a€complaint€for€divorce,Ïexcept€in€the€case€of€fraudulent€conveyance€in€anticipation€of€filing,Ïand€including€any€property€to€which€a€right€was€acquired€up€to€theÏdate€of€the€final€divorce€hearing,€and€valued€as€of€a€date€as€near€asÏreasonably€possible€to€the€final€divorce€hearing€date.ÌÌÌÌÓÓHusband€contends€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€properly€include€within€the€marital€estate€certainÏbedroom€furniture,€valued€at€$1,760,€which€Wife€testified€was€their€sonððs€separate€property.€€AsÏWifeððs€award€of€custody€and€the€marital€home€is€unchallenged,€these€items€clearly€should€remainÏwith€Wife.€€We€find€that,€properly,€they€should€have€been€included€within€the€marital€estate;Ïhowever,€we€hold€such€error€harmless€considering€the€overall€distribution€of€assets.€€HusbandÏfurther€contends€that€the€trial€court€incorrectly€valued€certain€property€determined€to€be€his€separateÏproperty:€golf€clubs€and€scuba€equipment€valued€by€the€court€at€$3,300.€€Husband€insists€that€theÏrecord€properly€reflects€a€value€of€$3,600.€€We,€like€Wife,€fail€to€see€how€this€alleged€errorÏprejudices€Husband€as€it€is€to€his€benefit.ÌÌà àIt€is€also€asserted€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€include€ð ðunaccounted€forÏportions€of€his€1993€bonusðð€as€marital€property.€€The€proof€shows€that€when€the€parties€separatedÏin€February€1993,€Husband€continued€to€deposit€his€pay€checks€and€his€annual€bonus€for€1993Ïinto€the€coupleððs€joint€bank€account€from€which€Wife€continued€to€pay€their€bills.€€In€return,€WifeÏpaid€Husband€$1,500€per€month€for€his€expenses.€€This€practice€continued€for€one€year.€ÏHusbandððs€1993€bonus€after€taxes€was€$20,065.€€Wife€testified€that€during€this€time€she€also€paidÏ$4,500€for€their€sonððs€school€tuition,€$2,500€for€her€school€tuition€and€another€$2,500€for€taxes.€ÏHusband€argues€that€the€unaccounted€for€remainder€of€$10,565€should€have€been€included€in€theÏmarital€estate€and€as€a€part€of€Wifeððs€division.€€Wife€testified€as€follows€regarding€the€familyððsÍcustomary€use€of€Husbandððs€bonus€money:€€ð ðWe€have€always€lived€on€the€total€amount€of€€.€.€.Ïwhat€he€gets€regularly€plus€his€bonus€every€year.€€So€.€.€.€itððs€put€into€.€.€.€a€savings€account€andÏdrawn€on€all€year€long€for€various€expenses€during€the€year.ðð€€Husband€agreed€that€ð ðbills€wereÏpaid€out€of€that€account.ðð€€Wife€testified€that€no€monies€remain€from€the€1993€bonus.€€HusbandÏtestified€that€he€withdrew€no€funds€from€the€account€after€the€coupleððs€separation.ÌÌà àIt€is€clear€that€both€parties€had€access€to€this€joint€account€which€was€primarily€usedÏfor€household€and€living€expenses.€€Such€use€at€least€to€some€extent€benefitted€Husband€as€well€as€ÏWife.€€We€find€no€error€by€the€trial€court€in€failing€to€include€a€portion€of€Husbandððs€1993€bonusÏas€marital€property.ÌÌà àFinally,€as€to€Husbandððs€first€issue,€it€is€asserted€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€valuingÏthe€marital€estate€to€consider€the€tax€consequences€to€Wife€upon€the€exercise€of€the€stock€optionsÏawarded€her€but€not€those€awarded€Husband.€€The€trial€court€awarded€Wife€stock€options€with€aÏnet€value€of€$47,960€and€Husband€stock€options€with€a€gross€value€of€$75,593.€€We€find€thisÏalleged€error€more€properly€addressed€under€Husbandððs€second€issue€concerning€distribution€ofÏthe€marital€estate.€€Our€divorce€statutes€require€an€equitable€division€of€the€marital€estate€withoutÏregard€to€fault.€€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„121(a).€€To€this€end,€the€trial€court€is€granted€broad€discretion€inÏadjusting€and€adjudicating€the€partiesðð€interest€in€all€jointly€owned€property.€€òòò òBatsonóóó ó,€769€S.W.2dÏat€859.€€Its€decision€regarding€division€of€the€marital€property€is€entitled€to€great€weight€on€appeal.€Ïòòò òIdóóó ó.€€ÌÌà àIn€addition€to€the€foregoing,€Husband€alleges€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€division€ofÏassets€when€determining€that€the€parties€had€previously€divided€the€personal€property€in€the€homeÏand€using€the€present€day€value€of€Husbandððs€defined€benefit€plan€(pension)€when€awarding€thisÏasset€to€him,€as€opposed€to€dividing€same€by€a€qualified€domestic€relations€order.€€As€to€the€latter,ÏHusband€argues€that€by€using€the€present€day€value€and€offsetting€it€with€liquid€or€semi„liquidÍassets,€he€is€left€with€insufficient€liquidity€with€which€to€pay€his€outstanding€debt€in€excess€ofÏ$60,000.€€He€asserts€ð ðthat€the€estate€is€not€large€enough€to€use€this€method.ðð€€According€to€theÏtestimony€of€Robert€Winfield,€a€certified€financial€planner,€Husbandððs€compensation€consists€of€aÏbase€salary,€$83,822,€ð ðsmall€variable€amountsðð€that€pertain€to€company€sales€contests,€his€bonusÏdependent€upon€national€and€regional€performance,€certain€reimbursed€expenses€and€a€variety€ofÏð ðbenefit€plans€that€also€contribute€taxable€income€to€his€W„2€each€year.ðð€€Winfield€stated€that€fromÏ1989€to€1993,€Husbandððs€annual€income€increased€at€a€rate€of€11%€per€year.ÌÌà àIn€dividing€the€marital€estate,€the€trial€court€expressly€found€ð ðthat€[Husband]€hasÏrelatively€greater€ability€than€[Wife]€to€acquire€future€capital€assets€and€income€.€.€.€.ðð€€We€find€theÏrecord€to€support€this€finding.€€Husbandððs€gross€annual€income€in€1994€was€$135,254.99€and€hisÏaverage€annual€earnings€from€1991€„€1994€were€approximately€$138,000.€€Although€Husband€wasÏawarded€less€liquidity,€the€record€clearly€demonstrates€a€greater€earning€ability€on€his€part.ÌÌà àHusband€argues€that€his€income€for€the€years€1991„94€includes€a€substantialÏamount€attributable€to€bonuses€and€the€sale€of€stock€options,€the€remainder€of€which€have€beenÏdivided€as€marital€assets.€€He€insist€that€without€the€exercise€of€his€stock€options,€which€is€merelyÏthe€value€of€a€marital€asset€awarded€him,€his€annual€income€is€primarily€limited€to€his€base€salaryÏand€bonus.€€The€record€indicates€that€Husband€has€received€a€bonus€from€General€Mills€every€yearÏsince€1989.€€Moreover,€evidence€introduced€by€Husband€reveals€that€even€without€HusbandððsÏcompensation€attributable€to€stock,€he€averaged€an€annual€income€from€1990€to€1994€ofÏapproximately€$113,000.€€Ìà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€awarded€Husband€approximately€$100,000€in€liquidÏassets€excluding€any€tax€consequences€on€stock€options.€€He€argues€that€Wife€was€awarded€overÏ$250,000€in€liquid€assets.€€The€record€indicates€that€she€was€also€ordered€to€pay€marital€debt€inÏexcess€of€$110,000€when€including€the€house€note€and€that€portion€of€her€attorneyððs€feesÏ($19,000)€for€which€the€court€ordered€her€responsible.€€Although€the€tax€consequences€toÍHusband€in€exercising€his€stock€options€were€not€included€in€the€trial€courtððs€calculations,€we€areÏpersuaded€that€such€was€done€in€Wifeððs€case€because€of€her€immediate€receipt€of€these€assets.€€ÌÌà àAs€to€the€furniture€in€the€marital€home,€Husband€is€correct€as€to€Wifeððs€testimonyÏthat€with€the€exception€of€a€t.v.€and€stand€and€a€few€other€items,€all€furniture€remained€in€theÏmarital€home.€€However,€she€stated€that€many€of€the€articles€of€furniture€belonged€to€her€prior€toÏthe€marriage.€€This€is€confirmed€by€the€fact€that€she€was€awarded€furniture€and€furnishings€in€theÏmarital€home€(including€jewelry€and€furs)€of€$12,990€as€her€separate€property.€€Husband€was€alsoÏawarded€furniture€and€furnishings€in€the€marital€home€valued€at€$615€as€his€separate€property.€ÏWife€commented€that€ð ðI€assume€there€is€furniture€that€we€could€talk€about€dividing.€.€.€.ðð€€The€finalÏdecree€awards€ð ðfurniture€and€furnishingsðð€in€the€marital€home€to€Wife€in€the€amount€of€$10,480Ïand€ð ðfurniture,€furnishings€and€clothes€located€at€Husbandððs€apartmentðð€in€the€amount€of€$6,350Ïas€marital€property.€€ÌÌà àIt€is€well€established€that€the€trial€courtððs€division€of€the€marital€estate€need€not€beÏequal€to€be€equitable.€€òòò òWadeóóó ó,€897€S.W.2d€at€717.€€Generally,€the€fairness€of€the€property€divisionÏis€judged€upon€its€final€results.€€òòò òIdóóó ó.€€Considering€all€relevant€factors€including€those€enumerated€inÏT.C.A.€ðð€36„4„121(c),€we€do€not€find€the€final€results€of€the€trial€courtððs€distribution€to€beÏinequitable.€ÌÌà àWe€next€address€the€issue€regarding€the€award€of€alimony€to€Wife.€€HusbandÏchallenges€only€the€amount€and€duration€of€the€rehabilitative€award€and€not€Wifeððs€entitlement€perÏse.€€He€argues€that€alimony€should€extend€no€longer€than€three€years€in€an€amount€less€than€thatÏawarded.€€It€is€his€position€that€Wife€is€capable€of€obtaining€adequate€employment€with€the€degreesÏshe€currently€possesses€and€certainly€when€she€receives€her€doctorate€in€1998.€€Husband€furtherÏasserts€that€the€trial€court€did€not€properly€consider€the€statutory€factors€set€forth€in€ðð€36„5„101(d),Ïparticularly€the€division€of€the€marital€estate€and€his€ability€to€pay.€€Finally,€it€is€asserted€that€inÍassessing€Wifeððs€needs,€the€court€did€not€properly€consider€Wifeððs€failure€to€pursue€possibleÏfinancial€aid€to€defray€her€academic€expenses.ÌÌà àWife€testified€that€she€will€complete€the€requirements€necessary€for€private€practiceÏin€the€year€2001.€€She€began€her€doctorate€program€in€counseling€and€personnel€services€at€theÏUniversity€of€Memphis€in€September€1994€and€expects€to€graduate€in€August€1998€if€she€continuesÏð ðtaking€the€course€load€that€they€have€programed€for€[her].€.€.€.ðð€€To€engage€in€private€practice,€sheÏwill€then€have€to€complete€an€additional€requirement€of€2000€hours€of€supervision.€€She€estimatedÏher€total€school€expenses€at€$2,000€per€semester.€€She€was€further€questioned:ÌÌÓÓà8 àQ.à à.€.€.€.€€Have€you€applied€for€a€graduate€[assistantship]?ÌÌà8 àA.à àNo,€I€havenððt.ÌÌà8 àà àà8 àQ.à àAnd€why€not?ÌÌà8 àA.à àWell,€I€was€given€to€believe€that€in€the€income€bracket€I€wasÏin€that€Iððd€be€at€the€bottom€of€the€list€.€.€.€our€program€has€only€beenÏvery€recently€given€a€couple€of€slots€.€.€.€as€far€as€[assistantships]€.€.Ï.€.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€[Ph.D.]€candidates€get€the€bulk€of€the€[assistantships],Ïand€then€whatever€is€left€is€given€to€the€people€that€are€in€the€[Ed.D.]Ïprogram€and€in€the€[Ed.S.]€program,€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àA.à àThe€other€component€of€that€[assistantship]€idea€is€that€IÏwould€have€to€work€20€hours€a€week€on€campus€.€.€.€in€addition€toÏgoing€to€school.€€And€as€I€said€earlier,€Iððve€tried€to€mold€my€timeÏaround€Stevenððs€comings€and€goings€from€school.€€And€if€I€were€toÏhave€an€[assistantship],€that€becomes€increasingly€difficult€toÏmanage€his€school€life€and€social€components€around€the€rest€of€hisÏlife€with€going€to€school,€too.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àRonnie€Priest,€an€assistant€professor€in€the€Department€of€Counseling,€EducationalÏPsychology€and€Research€at€the€University€of€Memphis€and€director€of€the€Ed.D.€program,Ïtestified€that€he€had€been€involved€in€the€placement€of€approximately€90€students€in€the€area€ofÏcounseling.€€After€graduating,€Wifeððs€employment€opportunities€ð ðrange€.€.€.€from€working€in€anÍagency€[such€as]€a€community€mental€health€center,€to€teaching€.€.€.ðð€with€an€annual€salary€range€ofÏ$25,000€(typically€the€initial€salary€for€someone€working€in€an€agency)€to€$35,000€(initial€salaryÏfor€assistant€professor).€€Priest€related€that€someone€employed€in€an€agency€with€only€a€masterððsÏdegree€would€earn€an€initial€annual€salary€of€approximately€$17,000.€€Priest€stated€that€if€WifeÏwishes€to€enter€private€practice€she€will€need€an€additional€2€to€2„1/2€years€of€supervision€afterÏobtaining€her€Ed.D.€prior€to€becoming€licensed.€€According€to€Priest,€Wife€will€ð ðmore€than€likelyððÏnot€get€paid€by€her€supervisor€and€will€ð ðwind€up€having€to€pay€the€supervisor.ðð€€Afterwards,€herÏannual€salary€will€be€contingent€on€the€clientele€she€has€been€able€to€establish€and€ð ðcould€rangeÏanywhere€from€$25,000€to€$50,000€a€year.ðð€€Priest€stated€that€upon€graduating€Wife€would€not€beÏoffered€a€position€at€the€University€of€Memphis€because€ð ðwe€donððt€hire€our€own.ðð€€The€only€otherÏinstitution€in€the€Memphis€area€offering€such€academic€position€is€Christian€Brothers.ÌÌà àPriest€stated€that€the€doctorate€degree€Wife€is€pursuing€requires€a€minimum€of€60Ïhours€above€her€masterððs€degree,€a€dissertation,€an€internship€and€a€residency€program€which€is€aÏresearch€project.€€The€approximate€cost€per€semester€for€a€full„time€student€is€$2,500.€€There€is€aÏhierarchy€in€the€department€regarding€the€granting€of€graduate€assistantships€with€preference€firstÏgiven€to€ð ðcounseling„psychðð€students€and€then€divided€between€ð ðeducational„psychðð€andÏcounseling€students.€€Wife€is€in€the€latter€category.€€Approximately€148€students€are€enrolled€in€theÏcounseling€department.ÌÌà àDavid€Ciscel,€an€economics€professor€at€the€University€of€Memphis€and€dean€of€itsÏgraduate€school€testified€that€full„time€enrollment€at€the€University,€including€summer€school,€toÏobtain€the€Ed.D.€degree€costs€approximately€$3,000€per€year€plus€an€additional€$1,500€a€year€forÏbooks,€supplies€and€fees.€€Twelve€teaching€or€research€assistantships€are€available€for€the€doctorateÏstudent€in€the€Ed.D.€department.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€the€cost€for€Wife€to€obtain€her€doctorate€degree€to€be€$18,000Íand€that€after€licensure€and€entering€private€practice€in€2001€she€could€earn€$35,000€to€$50,000€perÏyear€ð ð[g]iven€four€years€to€develop€her€practice.ðð€€The€court€determined€Husbandððs€net€base€salaryÏto€be€$4,890.47.€€With€his€bonus€and€other€benefits,€as€previously€stated,€he€has€averagedÏapproximately€$138,000€a€year€for€a€gross€monthly€income€of€over€$11,000.€€His€average€annualÏincome€over€the€past€four€years€excluding€his€stock€option€benefits€is€approximately€$115,000Ïwith€a€monthly€gross€income€of€approximately€$9,600.€€ÌÌà àHusband€asserts€that€even€with€his€bonus,€(which€over€the€past€six€years€has€beenÏan€average€of€$30,178)€he€is€unable€to€pay€the€amount€of€alimony€awarded€when€considering€hisÏportion€of€the€marital€debt€and€the€division€of€assets.€€We€note€that€the€trial€court€set€child€supportÏat€$1,027€per€month€plus€21%€of€Husbandððs€bonus€with€which€he€does€not€take€issue,€except€toÏthe€calculation€of€his€social€security€deduction€which€will€be€addressed€subsequently.€€HusbandÏlists€his€monthly€expenses€at€$6,474.86€which€includes€$495€for€credit€card€and€other€debtÏ(awarded€to€him€in€the€division€of€assets)€$60€for€the€childððs€sports€equipment€and€clothes,€$403Ïfor€debt€to€the€IRS,€$1,800€for€alimony× ƒ5 ××  ×€and€$1,026€for€child€support.€€Adjusting€HusbandððsÏcalculations€to€coincide€with€the€trial€courtððs€awards€for€alimony€and€child€support,€we€arrive€atÏtotal€monthly€expenses€of€approximately€$6,500.00.€€Wife€lists€monthly€expenses€in€her€pretrialÏaffidavit€at€$6,992.70€to€include€uninsured€medical€expenses,€school€expenses€for€the€partiesðð€sonÏas€well€as€a€college€trust€fund€for€the€child€in€the€amount€of€$983.€€Husband€asserts€that€these€latterÏexpenses€should€not€be€included€in€determining€Wifeððs€needs€since€he€has€been€ordered€to€assumeÏone„half€of€uninsured€medicals€for€Wife€and€child€as€well€as€the€latterððs€school€tuition€andÏexpenses.€€He€further€asserts€that€he€cannot€be€ordered€to€pay€the€childððs€college€expenses€underÏthe€guise€of€alimony.€€Wifeððs€calculations€also€include€$700€per€month€as€payment€for€certain€debtÏawarded€in€the€division€of€assets€and€her€attorneyððs€fees.€€Even€when€subtracting€these€amounts,Ïhowever,€Wife€still€has€monthly€expenses€in€excess€of€$4,500.€€The€record€is€clear€that€HusbandððsÍalimony€payments€of€$1,900€per€month€will€be€Wifeððs€sole€source€of€support€for€several€yearsÏother€than€the€assets€received€in€the€property€division.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€has€broad€discretion€concerning€the€amount€and€duration€of€spousalÏsupport.€€Its€decision€is€factually€driven€and€requires€a€balancing€of€factors€including€thoseÏenumerated€in€ðð€36„5„101(d).€€òòò òBrown€v.€Brownóóó ó,€913€S.W.2d€163,€169€(Tenn.€App.€1994).€ÏThe€most€significant€factors€are€need€and€the€ability€to€pay.€€òòò òLoyd€v.€Loydóóó ó,€860€S.W.2d€409Ï(Tenn.€App.€1993).€€The€express€findings€of€the€trial€court€on€this€issue€also€include€the€following,Ïwhich€we€find€supported€by€the€record:€During€at€least€the€last€five€years€of€the€marriage,€theÏparties€enjoyed€a€standard€of€living€in€excess€of€$100,000;€Wife€fulfilled€her€role€as€homemaker;Ïand€ð ð[t]he€relative€fault€in€the€case€rests€heavily€against€[Husband].ðð€€We€conclude€that€the€amountÏand€duration€of€alimony€is€warranted€under€these€facts€and€that€there€was€no€abuse€of€discretion€byÏthe€trial€court€in€this€regard.ÌÌà àHusband€also€challenges€the€alimony€award€as€it€relates€to€payment€of€WifeððsÏmedical€insurance€and€expenses.€€ð ðWhen€one€party€to€a€divorce€is€employed€and€is€able€to€secureÏgroup€health€care€insurance€through€the€employer€and€the€other€party€is€in€poor€health€and€wouldÏhave€difficulty€in€securing€health€care€insurance,€the€court€may€require€the€maintenance€of€healthÏcare€insurance€for€the€other€party.ðð€€W.€Walton€Garrett,€òòò òTennessee€Divorce,€Alimony€&ÏChild€Custodyóóó ó,€ðð€13„9€(1996€ed.).€Wife€is€currently€covered€under€Husbandððs€company€policy.€ÏBased€on€Wifeððs€past€medical€history,€involving€a€double€mastectomy€taken€as€a€preventativeÏmeasure€due€to€a€family€history€of€breast€cancer€and€surgery€for€uterine€fibroid€tumors,€both€forÏwhich€she€continues€to€be€monitored,€the€trial€court€determined€that€Wife€ð ðwill€have€troubleÏobtaining€insuranceðð€and€ordered€Husband€to€ð ðmaintain€[Wifeððs]€medical€insurance€coverage€and€.Ï.€.€pay€said€premiums€and€fifty€.€.€.€percent€of€uncovered€expenses€.€.€.€.ðð€€Husband€contends€thatÏthe€record€does€not€support€the€trial€courtððs€finding.€€Moreover,€it€is€asserted€that€the€trial€court€isÏwithout€statutory€authority€to€make€an€award€of€uncovered€medical€expenses€and€that€it€was€errorÍto€establish€the€award€indefinitely€which,€in€effect,€renders€an€award€of€alimony€òòò òin€futuroóóó ó.ÌÌà àFirst,€Husband€is€correct€in€arguing€that€the€record€fails€to€show€Wifeððs€un„insurability€or€future€difficulty€in€obtaining€health€insurance.€€The€only€testimony€in€this€respect€isÏthat€of€Wife€stating€that€ð ðthe€medical€problems€that€I€have€are€the€[kind]€.€.€.€that€would€precludeÏme€from€probably€getting€insurance€on€my€own€.€.€.€.ðð€€Under€the€present€circumstances,€weÏbelieve€it€appropriate€to€modify€the€final€decree€to€limit€Husbandððs€obligation€in€this€regard€toÏseven€years.€€We,€however,€are€not€persuaded€that€the€trial€court€lacks€authority€to€hold€himÏresponsible€during€this€time€period€for€one„half€of€Wifeððs€uncovered€medicals.€€The€statute€reliedÏupon€by€Husband,€T.C.A.€ðð€36„5„101(f),€states,€in€part,€that€ð ð[t]he€court€may€also€direct€a€party€toÏpay€the€premiums€for€insurance€insuring€the€health€care€costs€of€the€other€party.ðð€€Granted,€theÏstatute€does€not€expressly€refer€to€uncovered€medicals.€€The€trial€court,€however,€has€been€grantedÏbroad€statutory€power€in€establishing€the€type€of€alimony€award€necessary€based€on€the€particularÏfacts€involved.€€The€exercise€of€such€power€at€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€will€not€be€interfered€withÏabsent€a€showing€of€abuse.€€òòò òAaron€v.€Aaronóóó ó,€909€S.W.2d€408,€410€(Tenn.€1995);€òòò òLuna€v.ÏLunaóóó ó,€718€S.W.2d€673,€675€Tenn.€App.€1986).€€We€find€the€fact€that€the€trial€court€chose€toÏspecifically€designate€where€a€portion€of€Husbandððs€alimony€payments€will€be€directed€isÏinconsequential.ÌÌà àHusband€has€also€challenged€the€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€to€Wife.€€The€trial€courtÏawarded€Wife€two„thirds€of€her€legal€expenses€or€$38,798.66.€€In€awarding€these€fees,€the€trialÏcourt€held€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àAs€to€attorneyððs€fees,€Mr.€Watters€broke€the€marriageÏcontract€without€justification.€He€refused€to€respond€to€the€MaritalÏDissolution€Agreement€until€presenting€a€proposed€ruling€on€theÏmorning€of€trial.€€Mr.€Wattersðð€conduct€before€and€during€the€case,Ïforced€Mrs.€Watters€to€trial.€€The€trial€was€expensive.€It€requiredÏMrs.€Wattersðð€attorney€to€spend€a€great€deal€of€time,€effort,€andÏexpertise€for€her€representation€and€it€required€the€retention€and€useÏof€expert€witnesses.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àContemporaneous€with€this€issue€is€Husbandððs€assertion€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏrefusing€to€admit€the€settlement€proposal€which€he€contends€was€ð ðunreasonableðð€and€ð ðdemandedÏpayments€to€Wife€in€excess€of€[his]€income.ðð€€Wifeððs€counsel€testified€that€the€proposed€maritalÏdissolution€agreement€was€prepared€and€sent€to€Husband€ð ðearly€onðð€and€that€no€response€wasÏforthcoming€until€Husband€presented€his€proposed€ruling€on€the€first€day€of€trial.€€Counsel€furtherÏtestified€regarding€numerous€expert€witnesses€which€were€required€in€the€case€and€his€problemsÏobtaining€discovery€from€opposing€counsel.€€He€stated€that€ð ðweððve€had€to€litigate€every€issue€thatððsÏcome€upðð€and€that€the€expenses€would€have€been€reduced€had€discovery€been€forthcoming€in€aÏtimely€fashion.€€On€cross„examination,€Wifeððs€counsel€denied€that€the€proposal€demanded€moreÏthan€Husband€ð ðtook€home.ððÌÌà àHusband€argues€that€the€settlement€proposal€should€have€been€admitted€to€establishÏits€unreasonableness€and€to€address€the€credibility€of€opposing€counsel.€€We€are€inclined€to€agreeÏwith€Wife€that€the€trial€courtððs€decision€appears€influenced€not€by€the€contents€of€the€proposal€orÏwhether€or€not€it€was€accepted,€but€Husbandððs€failure€to€respond€to€it€in€any€manner€(to€furtherÏsettlement€negotiations)€until€the€first€morning€of€trial,€which€is€undisputed.€€In€any€event,€we€findÏany€error€in€failing€to€admit€the€proposal€harmless.€€The€record€supports€the€award€of€attorneyððsÏfees€to€Wife€when€considering€the€marital€debt€awarded€Wife,€her€monthly€expenses,€whichÏexceed€Husbandððs€monthly€alimony€obligation,€and€her€financial€situation€for€the€next€severalÏyears€until€completion€of€her€studies€and€establishing€of€her€career.€€The€award€of€legal€expenses€isÏappropriate€when€the€spouse€seeking€them€lacks€sufficient€funds€to€pay€her€expenses€or€would€beÏrequired€to€deplete€her€resources.€€òòò òBrownóóó ó,€913€S.W.2d€at€170.ÌÌà àThere€are€certain€other€evidentiary€matters€with€which€Husband€takes€issue.€€HeÏfirst€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€testimony€regarding€the€partiesðð€desire€to€send€theirÏson€to€college€and€the€monthly€amount€Wife€would€need€to€save€in€order€to€do€so€under€the€theoryÍthat€it€revealed€the€lifestyle€of€the€parties.€€Husband€submits€that€the€overall€result€to€his€prejudiceÏis€an€award€of€alimony€in€excess€of€his€ability€to€pay.€€We€have€already€determined€theÏappropriateness€of€the€alimony€award€and€thus€find€any€error€in€the€admission€of€this€testimonyÏharmless.€€Husband€also€questions€the€trial€courtððs€allowance€of€a€ð ðtime€lineðð€outlining€HusbandððsÏmisconduct€during€the€marriage€when€the€grounds€for€divorce€were€stipulated.€€The€record€doesÏnot€indicate€any€prejudice€to€Husband€in€this€regard.€€The€matter€was€heard€before€the€judge€sittingÏwithout€a€jury€and€Husband€had€already€admitted€in€his€answer€to€inappropriate€marital€conductÏand€acts€of€adultery.€€We€further€do€not€find€prejudicial€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€ordering€disclosureÏof€certain€ð ðworking€documentsðð€of€Husbandððs€expert€witness€and€allowing€introduction€of€theÏdocuments€into€evidence.€€Husband€insists€that€the€documents€submitted€did€not€contain€dataÏunderlying€the€expertððs€opinions,€as€required€under€Rule€706,€Tennessee€Rules€of€Evidence,€andÏwere€admitted€for€the€sole€reason€of€revealing€the€expertððs€handwritten€note€which€could€beÏconstrued€as€an€unfavorable€comment€regarding€the€trial€judge.€€There€is€ample€evidence€in€theÏrecord€to€support€the€trial€courtððs€findings€regarding€division€of€the€marital€estate€and€the€award€ofÏalimony.€€We€do€not€find€its€decision€to€display€undue€prejudice€toward€Husband.ÌÌà àTurning€to€the€last€issue,€Husband€alleges€error€in€the€manner€in€which€the€trialÏcourt€calculated€the€social€security€deduction€from€his€bonuses€for€purposes€of€child€support.€€TheÏtrial€court€awarded€21%€of€Husbandððs€bonus€to€Wife€as€child€support€ð ðafter€deducting€for€incomeÏtaxes€and€social€security€.€.€.€.ðð€€The€court€determined€that€the€deduction€for€social€security€ð ðshallÏbe€in€accordance€with€the€net€social€security€percentage€paid€by€[Husband]€for€the€current€calendarÏyear€calculated€as€follows:€Total€Social€Security€paid€for€current€year€[divided€by]€Total€GrossÏIncome€for€previous€year€=€Percentage€(%)€of€Social€Security;€Gross€Amount€of€Bonus€x€%€ofÏSocial€Security€=€Amount€of€Social€Security€to€be€deducted€from€gross€bonus€for€purposes€ofÏcalculating€child€support.ððÌÌà àWe€are€inclined€to€agree€with€Husband€that€the€deductions€for€social€security€asÍprescribed€in€the€Child€Support€Guidelines,€specifically€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€Title€1240€ch.Ï2„4„.03(4),€are€to€be€applied€in€this€case.€€We€are€unable€to€determine€from€the€record€theÏreasoning€for€the€trial€courtððs€deviation€as€there€are€no€written€findings.ÌÌà àIt€results€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€to€provide€that€HusbandÏshall€be€responsible€for€maintaining€medical€insurance€for€Wife€and€shall€pay€one„half€of€herÏuncovered€medical€expenses€for€seven€years€(or€until€her€death€or€remarriage)€„€the€ceasing€of€suchÏobligation€to€coincide€with€the€termination€of€Husbandððs€rehabilitative€alimony€obligation.€€TheÏjudgment€is€further€modified€to€reflect€a€child€€support€award€inclusive€of€Husbandððs€bonus€withÏdeductions€for€social€security€as€set€forth€under€the€Child€Support€Guidelines.€€The€judgment€is€inÏall€other€respects€affirmed.€€Costs€are€assessed€equally€against€the€parties.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌLILLARD,€J.€(Concurs)›