ÿWPCû6 …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝ 0 ³å4˜ ¬ 0D» 0Lÿ 0JK 0T• 0^é 0hG 0r¯ 0|! 0† Ú# w@ý 0= 1uÍU ,B 0dnU,ÒU(>þB)<DCe AM¨U*õ5 0@T†” B D37jŒ} 0N ËWý" U( Ÿ}!§#öÃ$L¹,v~.vÓƒ/ AOV5Æ¥5 0Dk6 D/¯6 BÞ6˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 'æ() Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular¼($¡¡- ù-(c(2ï/$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€XebX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóGav (3|x†(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó> ÿÿ$Small Circleððà0 à2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔSequatchieSchultenDunlapspousalPerkinson Hoyt S.W.PajakS.E.2dLightmanMagid tUuDvwUx9eyzÓ€„…†2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd€*&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial +Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÔ€(ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€(XÔÌÌMay€3,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Òwilson v. wilson - opinion Ì: ' IB011C20IB011C2 .    d----'ÿÿdxd Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝMr.€Wilson€and€his€first€wife€had€three€children.€€Their€oldest€daughter€was€an€adultÏwhen€they€were€divorced,€and€Mr.€Wilson€and€his€first€wife€agreed€to€a€joint€custodyÏarrangement€with€regard€to€their€two€minor€sons.€€The€boys€lived€alternately€with€their€motherÏand€father.Ì ‚Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòLightman€v.€Magid,óó€54€Tenn.€App.€701,€710,€394€S.W.2d€151,€156Ï(1965)€(the€husband€and€wife€were€seventy„one€and€fifty„eight€years€old€respectively,€and€theÏhusband€had€children€from€a€previous€marriage);€òòBaker€v.€Baker,óó€24€Tenn.€App.€220,€226,Ï142€S.W.2d€737,€741€(1940)€(the€husband€and€wife€were€sixty€years€old,€and€both€hadÏchildren€from€their€previous€marriages).Ì>‡¦$"Small Circleð"ðà0  à ÁÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòWilliams€v.€Williams,óó€868€S.W.2d€at€619;òò€Hartz€v.€Hartz,óó€234€A.2d€865,€870€(Md.Ï1966);€òòFick€v.€Fick,óó€851€P.2d€445,€450€(Nev.€1993);€òòSimeone€v.€Simeone,€óó581€A.2d€162,Ï167€(Pa.€1990).Ì óÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€formulation€of€the€standard€is€used€by€the€twenty„one€states€which€have€adoptedÏeither€the€Uniform€Premarital€Agreement€Act,€ðð€6(a)(2)(I),€9B€U.L.A.€369,€376€(1983)€or€theÏUniform€Marital€Property€Act,€ðð€10(g)(2)(ii),€9A€U.L.A.€103,€122€(1983).Ì ÿÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòHerget€v.€Herget,óó€550€A.2d€382,€385€(Md.€App.€1988),€òòrev'd€on€other€groundsóó,€573ÏA.2d€798€(Md.€1990);òò€Panossian€v.€Panossian,óó€569€N.Y.S.2d€182,€184€(App.€Div.€1991);òò€InÏre€Estate€of€Beesley€(Beesley€v.€Harris),óó€883€P.2d€1343,€1348€(Utah€1994).Ì KÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòFarver€v.€Hilty,óó€No.€S„91„3,€1991€WL€254224,€at€*3€(Ohio€Ct.€App.€Oct.€11,€1991).Ì •Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝMr.€Wilson€testified€later€that€the€value€of€the€zero€coupon€bonds€at€maturity€wasÏ$31,000€but€that€their€market€value€in€1991€prior€to€the€marriage€was€$18,232.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€$2,646€difference€between€the€total€increase€in€the€value€of€these€accounts€andÏMr.€Wilsonððs€contributions€represents€the€investment€income€of€these€two€accounts.Ì ìÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓ` °‚XA ¸ ™XÓOur€courts€have€traditionally€invalidated€provisions€in€prenuptial€agreements€that€affectÏa€spouseððs€right€to€spousal€support.€€òòKahn€v.€Kahn,óó€756€S.W.2d€at€694;òò€Duncan€v.€Duncan,Ïóó652€S.W.2d€913,€915€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983);€òòCrouch€v.€Crouch,óó€53€Tenn.€App.€594,€604,Ï385€S.W.2d€288,€293€(1964).€€Most€other€jurisdictions€now€honor€agreements€affectingÏspousal€support.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòEdwardson€v.€Edwardson,óó€798€S.W.2d€941,€943„46€(Ky.€1990);ÏòòFrey€v.€Frey,€óó471€A.2d€705,€710€(Md.€1984);€òòsee€alsoóó€1€John€Tingley€&€Nicholas€B.€Svalina,ÏòòMarital€Property€Lawóó€ðððð€€25:01€„€25:05€(rev.€2d€ed.€1995).ÌÌà àIn€1989,€a€panel€of€the€Western€Section€of€this€Court€declined€to€follow€the€traditional€ruleÏand€predicted€that€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€would€uphold€spousal€support€restrictions€inÏotherwise€valid€prenuptial€agreements€when€squarely€presented€with€the€issue.€€òòGross€v.ÏGross,óó€C.A.€No.€257,€slip€op.€at€6€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€17,€1989)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11Ïapplication€filed).€€Recently,€another€Western€Section€panel€declined€to€follow€the€òòGrossóóÏdecision€and€declined€to€give€effect€to€a€prenuptial€agreementððs€spousal€support€restriction.€ÏòòCary€v.€Cary,óó€App.€No.€02„A„01„9401„CV„0003,€slip€op.€at€9€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jan.€26,Ï1995),€òòperm.€app.€grantedóó€(Tenn.€May€1,€1995).€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€toÏreview€òòCary€v.€Caryóó€provides€strong€support€for€the€òòGrossóó€courtððs€prediction€of€the€demise€ofÏthe€traditional€rule.ÌÌà àIt€is€not€necessary€for€us€to€address€the€question€of€the€enforceability€of€the€prenuptialÏagreementððs€spousal€support€restriction€because€Mr.€Wilson€has€explicitly€waived€his€relianceÏon€this€provision.Ì BÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÔ€$XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝDuring€the€marriage,€Mr.€Wilson€earned€$75,898,€while€Ms.€Moore€earned€$1,587.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò€*‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€##X„d&ÓÑ#€##Xd#ÑÔ€$ÔÔ€$¼ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÑ Ü ÑÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€_j¼¼ddÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ , ÑÑ   ÑÑ  ÑÑ€% §u` ÑÔ€$„ÔÑ  Ñœ›à@ àœò ò€IN›€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEó óÌÙ€€ÙœßL€')&;+'h|ýü)` ç `€€Lß›ÌÔ€$¼ÔÌÌÌÌHAYDEN€D.€WILSON,€JR.,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àœ€€€€€€€€€€›à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSequatchie€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€6368ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9506„CV„00235ÌKATHRYN€ANN€MOORE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€SEQUATCHIE€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€DUNLAP,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€BUDDY€D.€PERRY,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€theÏDefendant/Appellantóó:ÌÌStephen€T.€Greerà àà àà àà àà àà àJacqueline€E.€SchultenÌDunlap,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àà àChattanooga,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÔ€$„Ôà@ àò òMODIFIED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÔ€$¼ÔÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,ÏJUDGEÌÓ€ÓÔ€$„Ôà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÑ ° ÑÑ „ ÑÔ€$¼Ôà àÌà àThis€appeal€involves€a€marriage€that€failed€in€less€than€three€years.€€TheÏhusband€filed€suit€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Sequatchie€County€seeking€aÏdivorce€and€the€enforcement€of€the€partiesðð€prenuptial€agreement.€€The€wifeÏalso€requested€a€divorce€and€challenged€the€validity€of€the€prenuptialÏagreement.€€Following€a€bench€trial,€the€trial€court€declared€the€partiesÏdivorced€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„129(b)€(1991)€and€upheld€theÏprenuptial€agreement.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€awarded€the€parties€theirÏpersonal€property€and€directed€the€husband€to€assume€certain€credit€cardÏindebtedness€and€to€provide€the€wife€medical€insurance€for€up€to€thirty„sixÏmonths.€€Both€parties€take€issue€with€various€portions€of€the€final€divorceÏdecree€on€this€appeal.€€We€have€determined€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failingÏto€consider€the€husbandððs€income€earned€during€the€marriage€as€maritalÏproperty.€€Accordingly,€we€modify€the€division€of€marital€property€and€theÏaward€of€spousal€support.ÌÌà@ àò òI.ó óÌÌà àHayden€Wilson,€Jr.€and€Kathryn€M.€Wilson€(now€Kathryn€Ann€Moore)Ïfirst€met€when€they€were€both€employed€by€the€Sequatchie€County€Board€ofÍEducation.€€Mr.€Wilson,€who€was€in€his€mid„forties€at€the€time,€had€aÏdoctorate€degree€in€educational€psychology€and€guidance€and€was€a€specialÏeducation€instructor.€€Ms.€Moore€worked€at€the€same€school€as€an€aide.€€SheÏwas€eight€years€younger€than€Mr.€Wilson€and€was€a€recent€divorce€withÏcustody€of€two€minor€children.€€They€began€dating€shortly€after€Mr.€WilsonððsÏdivorce€in€February€1990.€€ÌÌà àMr.€Wilson€proposed€to€Ms.€Moore€in€March€1991.€€Two€months€later,ÏMs.€Moore€received€her€undergraduate€degree€and€was€employed€at€a€localÏpharmacy.€€Mr.€Wilson€requested€Ms.€Moore€to€sign€a€prenuptial€agreementÏbecause€he€desired€to€preserve€his€separate€assets€for€his€children.€€Ms.€MooreÏwas€generally€ambivalent€about€signing€the€agreement.€€On€the€only€occasionÏshe€questioned€the€need€for€the€agreement,€Mr.€Wilson€informed€her€that€heÏwould€not€pay€her€to€marry€him.€€Thereafter,€Mr.€Wilson€requested€theÏlawyer€who€had€represented€Ms.€Moore€in€her€divorce€from€her€first€husbandÏto€prepare€the€agreement.€€They€signed€the€agreement€on€July€18,€1991€andÏwere€married€ten€days€later€on€July€28,€1991.€€Ms.€Moore€and€her€twoÏchildren€moved€in€with€Mr.€Wilson€and€his€two€minor€children.× ƒ0 ××  ×€ÌÌà àMs.€Moore€suffered€a€work„related€injury€and€stopped€working€at€theÏpharmacy€shortly€after€the€wedding.€€The€partiesðð€relationship€developedÏserious€problems€later€in€the€year,€and€by€December€1991,€Ms.€MooreÏdeclared€that€she€wanted€a€divorce.€€Mr.€Wilson€also€consulted€a€lawyer€aboutÏa€divorce.€€An€uneasy€stalemate€developed,€and€the€parties€began€livingÏessentially€separate€lives€in€June€1992€when€Ms.€Moore€enrolled€atÍChattanooga€State€Technical€Community€College€to€study€radiologicalÏtechnology.€€She€spent€most€of€the€time€during€the€week€at€school,€and€sheÏstudied€most€of€the€time€when€she€was€at€home.ÌÌà àThe€parties€separated€in€November€1993,€and€Mr.€Wilson€filed€suit€forÏdivorce€on€November€8,€1993.€€Ms.€Moore€counterclaimed€for€divorce.€ÏFollowing€a€trial€in€May€1994,€the€trial€court€entered€a€final€decree€declaringÏthe€parties€divorced€and€finding€that€their€prenuptial€agreement€was€valid.€ÏThe€trial€court€also€found€that€Mr.€Wilsonððs€contributions€to€his€retirementÏaccounts€during€the€marriage€were€marital€property€and€awarded€Ms.€MooreÏone„half€of€these€funds.€€The€court€also€directed€Mr.€Wilson€to€be€responsibleÏfor€$1,500€in€credit€card€debt€and€to€provide€Ms.€Moore€with€health€insuranceÏcoverage€for€up€to€thirty„six€months€or€until€she€found€employment.ÌÌà àMr.€Wilson€filed€a€post„trial€motion€taking€issue€with€the€portion€of€theÏdecision€awarding€Ms.€Moore€one„half€of€the€contributions€to€his€retirementÏaccounts€made€during€the€marriage.€€The€trial€court€altered€its€originalÏdecision€after€determining€that€the€prenuptial€agreement€prevented€Ms.€MooreÏfrom€receiving€a€share€of€Mr.€Wilsonððs€retirement€contributions.€€This€appealÏfollowed.ÌÌà@ àò òII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Validity€of€the€Prenuptial€Agreementó óóóÌÌà àMs.€Moore€disputes€the€validity€of€the€prenuptial€agreement€on€theÏground€that€Mr.€Wilson€did€not€disclose€his€financial€holdings€with€sufficientÏprecision€before€she€executed€the€agreement.€€We€disagree.€€Mr.€WilsonððsÍexplanation€of€his€financial€holdings€was€sufficient€to€enable€Ms.€Moore€toÏmake€a€knowledgeable€decision€with€regard€to€executing€the€agreement.ÌÌà@ àò òA.ó óÌÌà àPrenuptial€agreements€are€favored€by€public€policy€in€Tennessee.€ÏòòPerkinson€v.€Perkinson,óó€802€S.W.2d€600,€601€(Tenn.€1990);€òòHoyt€v.€Hoyt,óóÏ213€Tenn.€117,€125,€372€S.W.2d€300,€303€(1963);€òòKey€v.€Collins,óó€145€Tenn.Ï106,€109,€236€S.W.€3,€4€(1921).€€They€benefit€the€parties€by€defining€theirÏmarital€rights€in€property€which€tend€to€be€among€the€most€frequent€causes€ofÏfamily€discord.€€òòSanders€v.€Sanders,óó€40€Tenn.€App.€20,€30,€288€S.W.2d€473,Ï477€(1955).€€They€also€enhance€the€opportunities€for€middle„aged€persons€toÏre„marry€by€protecting€their€separate€assets€for€the€children€of€previousÏmarriages.€€òòPajak€v.€Pajak,óó€385€S.E.2d€384,€388€(W.€Va.€1989).× ƒ1 ××  ×€€ÌÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„3„501€(1991)€requires€the€courts€to€give€effect€toÏprenuptial€agreements€as€long€as€they€satisfy€certain€requirements.€€To€beÏenforceable,€the€agreement€€must€ð ðhave€been€entered€into€by€such€spousesÏfreely,€knowledgeably€and€in€good€faith€without€exertion€of€duress€or€undueÏinfluence€on€either€spouse.ðð€€This€record€contains€no€evidence€of€duress,Ïundue€influence,€or€bad€faith€on€Mr.€Wilsonððs€part.€€Thus,€the€principal€focusÏof€this€aspect€of€the€appeal€is€on€the€requirement€that€the€spouse€enter€into€theÏprenuptial€agreement€knowledgeably.ÌÌÑ Ü Ñà àAn€engagement€to€marry€establishes€a€confidential€relationship€betweenÏthe€parties.€€òòBaker€v.€Bakeróó,€24€Tenn.€App.€220,€223,€142€S.W.2d€737,€745Ï(1940);òò€see€alsoóó€1€Homer€H.€Clark,€Jr.,€òòThe€Law€of€Domestic€Relations€in€theÏUnited€States,óó€ðð€1.9,€at€44€(2d€ed.€1987);€3€Alexander€Lindley€&€Louis€I.ÏParley,€òòLindley€on€Separation€Agreements€and€œAntenuptual›€Contracts,óó€ðð€90.03Ï(MB)€(1995).€€Accordingly,€engaged€persons€who€plan€to€execute€a€prenuptialÏagreement€must€make€ð ða€full€disclosure€of€the€nature,€extent€and€valueðð€ofÏtheir€property€in€order€to€enable€their€prospective€spouse€to€make€aÏknowledgeable€decision€about€entering€into€the€agreement.€€òòWilliams€v.ÏWilliams,óó€868€S.W.2d€616,€619€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€The€requiredÏdisclosure€may€be€accomplished€through€a€formal,€explicit€process,€such€asÏexchanging€lists€of€holdings,€or€it€can€be€made€more€informally€over€theÏcourse€of€the€relationship.€€òòKahn€v.€Kahn,óó€756€S.W.2d€685,€695€(Tenn.€1988).ÌÌà àThe€adequacy€of€a€particular€disclosure€depends€upon€the€context€inÏwhich€it€was€made.€€Therefore,€the€lengths€to€which€a€person€must€go€inÏrevealing€his€or€her€financial€interests€can€only€be€determined€by€theÏcircumstances€of€each€particular€case.€€Rather€than€formulating€precise€tests,Ïmany€courts€have€required€that€the€disclosure€be€ð ðfull€and€fairðð× ƒ3 ××  ×€or€ð ðfair€andÏreasonableðð× ƒ4 ××  ×€or€some€other€similar€formulation.€€All€these€standards,€inÏessence,€require€that€the€disclosure€be€essentially€fair€under€all€theÏcircumstances.ÌÌà àWhile€some€state€courts€have€resolved€the€issue€differently,€most€courtsÏhave€not€construed€the€full€and€fair€disclosure€requirement€to€mandate€detailedÏdisclosures€such€as€financial€statements,€appraisals,€balance€sheets,€or€the€like.òò€ÏIn€re€Estate€of€Lopata,óó€641€P.2d€952,€955€(Colo.€1982);òò€In€re€Thies€(Thies€v.ÏLowe),óó€903€P.2d€186,€189€(Mont.€1995);€òòIn€re€Estate€of€Geyeróó,€533€A.2d€423,Ï427€(Pa.€1987);€òòHartz€v.€Hartz,óó€234€A.2d€865,€871€n.4€(Md.€1967);€òòIn€reÏEstate€of€Hill,óó€335€N.W.2d€750,€753€(Neb.€1983);€òòsee€also,óó€2€John€Tingley€&ÏNicholas€P.€Svalina,€òòMarital€Property€Law,óó€ðð€28.05€(rev.€2d€ed.€1995).€€Thus,Ïin€the€absence€of€fraud€or€overreaching,€the€inadvertent€failure€to€disclose€anÏasset× ƒ5 ××  ×€or€the€unintentional€undervaluation€of€an€asset× ƒ6 ××  ×€will€not€invalidate€aÏprenuptial€agreement€as€long€as€the€disclosure€that€was€made€provides€anÏessentially€accurate€understanding€of€the€partyððs€financial€holdings.€€TheÏdisclosure€will€be€deemed€adequate€if€it€imparts€an€accurate€understanding€ofÏthe€nature€and€extent€of€a€personððs€property€interests.òò€€Nanini€v.€Nanini,óó€802ÏP.2d€438,€441€(Ariz.€Ct.€App.€1990).ÌÌà@ àò òB.ó óÌÌà àMr.€Wilsonððs€financial€holdings€immediately€prior€to€his€marriage€toÏMs.€Moore€consisted€of€(1)€a€360„acre€farm€partially€owned€with€his€parents,Ï(2)€a€furnished€farm€house,€(3)€farm€equipment€and€vehicles,€(4)Ïapproximately€seventy€head€of€livestock,€(5)€a€boat,€and€(6)€twelve€otherÍaccounts€or€assets€worth€between€$130,000€and€$160,000.€€While€he€did€notÏprovide€Ms.€Moore€with€a€detailed€list€of€these€assets€and€their€value€prior€theÏexecution€of€the€prenuptial€agreement,€he€attempted€as€best€he€could€toÏfamiliarize€her€with€his€holdings.ÌÌà àMs.€Moore€was€familiar€with€Mr.€Wilsonððs€farm€and€was€even€privy€toÏhis€negotiations€in€1991€to€sell€a€portion€of€the€farm€to€Charles€Green.€€SheÏwas€also€familiar€with€the€farm€house€and€its€contents€because€she€had€visitedÏthere€often€while€the€parties€were€dating.€€Sometime€after€the€engagement,ÏMr.€Wilson€removed€each€of€his€financial€files€from€a€filing€cabinet€in€hisÏbedroom,€described€each€one€of€his€accounts€to€Ms.€Moore,€and€even€gave€herÏan€estimate€of€the€current€value€of€the€assets.€€Mr.€Wilson€unintentionallyÏoverlooked€a€$5,000€certificate€of€deposit€and€250€shares€of€stock€in€FirstÏPikeville€Bank€because€he€did€not€have€folders€for€these€assets.€€He€alsoÏovervalued€his€Sherson€Lehman€account€by€approximately€$13,000€because€heÏmistook€the€maturity€value€of€the€bonds€in€the€account€for€their€currentÏmarket€value.× ƒ7 ××  ×ÌÌà àMs.€Moore€seemed€generally€disinterested€in€the€information€about€Mr.ÏWilsonððs€holdings.€€She€asked€no€questions€while€Mr.€Wilson€was€describingÏhis€property€and€never€asked€for€additional€information€about€these€accounts.€ÏShe€reviewed€and€signed€the€prenuptial€agreement€ten€days€before€the€weddingÏwithout€comment€or€question.€€The€agreement,€which€was€drafted€by€Ms.ÏMooreððs€former€lawyer€at€Mr.€Wilsonððs€request,€specifically€recited€that€bothÏparties€were€ð ðfully€acquainted€with€the€business€and€resources€of€the€other,ððÍthat€both€parties€ð ðunderstood€the€assets€and€possessions€of€the€other,ðð€that€bothÏparties€had€ð ðanswered€all€questions€the€other€has€asked€about€income€andÏassets,ðð€and€that€both€parties€ð ðhad€access€to€any€and€all€financial€informationÏof€the€other€party.ððÌÌà àUnder€all€the€circumstances€of€this€case,€Mr.€Wilson€made€a€full€andÏfair€disclosure€of€his€financial€holdings€to€Ms.€Moore.€€His€inadvertentÏomission€of€two€assets€whose€value€comprised€ten€to€fifteen€percent€of€theÏtotal€value€of€his€holdings€was€not€material€or€significant€enough€to€preventÏthe€enforcement€of€the€prenuptial€agreement.€€This€omission€was€also€partiallyÏoff„set€by€Mr.€Wilsonððs€mistaken€overvaluation€of€one€of€his€other€assets.€ÏAccordingly,€we€concur€with€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€Mr.€WilsonððsÏdisclosure€of€his€holdings€was€sufficient€to€enable€Ms.€Moore€to€execute€theÏprenuptial€agreement€knowledgeably€as€required€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„3„501.ÌÌà@ àò òIII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òThe€Division€of€the€Marital€Propertyó óóóÌÌà àMs.€Moore€also€takes€issue€with€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€classify€theÏincrease€in€value€of€several€of€Mr.€Wilsonððs€accounts€during€the€marriage€asÏhis€separate€property.€€Since€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„121(a)€(1991)€vests€trialÏcourts€with€wide€discretion€with€regard€to€classifying€and€dividing€property,ÏòòFisher€v.€Fisher,óó€648€S.W.2d€244,€246€(Tenn.€1983),€these€decisions€areÏentitled€to€great€weight€on€appeal.€€òòEdwards€v.€Edwards,óó€501€S.W.2d€283,€288Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973).€€They€will€be€presumed€to€be€correct€unless€theÏevidence€preponderates€otherwise,€òòHardin€v.€Hardin,óó€689€S.W.2d€152,€154Í(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983),€or€unless€they€are€based€on€an€error€of€law.òò€€MahaffeyÏv.€Mahaffey,óó€775€S.W.2d€618,€622€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€ÌÌà@ àò òA.Ìà@ àòòMr.€Wilsonððs€Retirement€Accountsóóó óÌÌà àMr.€Wilson€participated€in€the€Tennessee€Consolidated€RetirementÏSystem€and€in€the€state„sponsored€403(b)€deferred€compensation€programÏduring€the€marriage.€€He€arranged€for€his€retirement€contributions€and€hisÏmonthly€$350€contributions€to€his€403(b)€plan€to€be€deducted€automaticallyÏfrom€his€paycheck.€€From€September€1991€through€March€1994,€Mr.€WilsonÏcontributed€$4,099€to€his€retirement€plan€and€approximately€$11,850€in€hisÏ403(b)€plan.€€As€a€result€of€the€earnings€on€these€investments,€the€combinedÏvalue€of€both€accounts€increased€by€approximately€$18,594.97× ƒ8 ××  ×€during€theÏmarriage.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€first€determined€that€the€increase€in€the€value€of€Mr.ÏWilsonððs€retirement€accounts€during€the€marriage€was€marital€property€andÏawarded€Ms.€Moore€one„half€of€the€total€increase.€€The€trial€court€laterÏreversed€itself.€€We€have€determined€that€the€trial€courtððs€first€decision€wasÏcorrect.€€These€contributions€were€marital€property.ÌÌà àThe€prenuptial€agreement€contains€two€provisions€relevant€to€theÏclassification€of€Mr.€Wilsonððs€retirement€contributions.€€One€on€hand,€it€states:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àThe€parties€hereto€shall€retain€the€title€to€andÏshall€manage€and€control€the€estate€which€they€nowÍown,€or€which€they€may€inherit€or€receive€by€gift,Ïwhether€it€be€realty,€personalty€or€mixed,€togetherÏwith€all€increase€or€addition€thereto,€as€though€suchÏparty€had€remained€single€and€unmarried,€andÏentirely€free€and€unmolested€by€the€other€party,€asÏwell€as€the€right€to€encumber,€sell,€dispose€of€or€giveÏaway,€by€will€or€otherwise,€all€of€said€estate€soÏseparately€owned€and€possessed.€€Should€theÏmarriage€between€the€parties€be€terminated€byÏannulment€or€divorce€.€.€.€no€claim€for€propertyÏdistribution€alimony,€[or]€support€.€.€.€shall€be€madeÏby€either€of€the€parties€hereto€against€the€other€partyÏor€the€estate€or€inheritance€or€gifts€of€the€otherÏparty.ÌÌÓ€ÓOn€the€other€hand,€it€also€states:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àBoth€parties€acknowledge€that€they€may€accumulateÏcertain€other€property€during€their€marriage€byÏvirtue€of€their€joint€efforts.€€Such€property€acquiredÏjointly€shall€not€be€deemed€part€of€the€separateÏproperty€of€the€parties€discussed€herein.ÌÌÓ€ÓThus,€the€parties€agreed€that€increases€in€the€value€of€their€separate€propertyÏwould€be€considered€separate€property€but€that€they€could€also€accumulateÏmarital€property€during€the€marriage.ÌÌà àPrenuptial€agreements€should€be€construed€with€reference€to€the€statutesÏgoverning€the€distribution€of€marital€property.€€They€should€also€be€construedÏusing€the€rules€of€construction€applicable€to€contracts€in€general.€€òòIn€re€EstateÏof€Wiseman,óó€889€S.W.2d€215,€217€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);€òòGilley€v.€Gilley,óóÏ778€S.W.2d€862,€863€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989);€òòSanders€v.€Sanders,óó€40€Tenn.ÏApp.€20,€30,€288€S.W.2d€473,€477€(1955).€€Thus,€the€courtsðð€role€is€toÏascertain€and€to€give€effect€to€the€contracting€partiesðð€intent.€€òòBob€PearsallÏMotors,€Inc.€v.€Regal€Chrysler„Plymouth,€Inc.,€óó521€S.W.2d€578,€580€(Tenn.Í1975);€òòWinfree€v.€Educators€Credit€Union,óó€900€S.W.2d€285,€289€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1995).ÌÌà àContracting€partiesðð€intent€is€embodied€in€their€written€agreements.€ÏòòGredig€v.€Tennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.€Co.,óó€891€S.W.2d€909,€912€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1994).€€Accordingly,€the€courts€must€examine€the€text€of€the€contract€inÏthe€context€of€the€entire€agreement.€€òòCocke€County€Bd.€of€Highway€CommððrsÏv.€Newport€Utils.€Bd.,óó€690€S.W.2d€231,€237€(Tenn.€1985);€òòCookevilleÏGynecology€&€Obstetrics,€P.C.€v.€Southeastern€Data€Sys.,€Inc.,óó€884€S.W.2dÏ458,€462€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).€Contractual€terms€should€be€given€theirÏordinary€meaning,€òòBreeding€v.€Shackelford,óó€888€S.W.2d€770,€775€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1994);€òòJaffe€v.€Bolton,óó€817€S.W.2d€19,€25€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991),€andÏshould€be€construed€harmoniously€to€give€effect€to€all€provisions€and€to€avoidÏcreating€internal€conflicts.€€òòRainey€v.€Stansell,€óó836€S.W.2d€117,€119€(Tenn.ÏCt.€App.€1992);€òòPark€Place€Ctr.€Enters.,€Inc.€v.€Park€Place€Mall€Assocs.,€L.P.,óóÏ836€S.W.2d€113,€116€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€Ambiguities€in€contractÏlanguage€should€be€construed€against€the€party€responsible€for€drafting€theÏcontract.€€òòHanover€Ins.€Co.€v.€Haney,óó€221€Tenn.€148,€153„54,€425€S.W.2dÏ590,€592„93€(1968);€òòGrand€Valley€Lakes€Property€Owners€Assððn€v.€Cary,óó€897ÏS.W.2d€262,€267€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).ÌÌà àMr.€Wilson€asserts€that€the€contributions€to€his€retirement€accountsÏduring€the€marriage€should€not€be€subject€to€division€as€marital€propertyÏbecause€they€were€ð ðincreasesðð€or€ð ðadditionsðð€to€accounts€he€owned€prior€to€theÏmarriage.€€Ms.€Moore,€on€the€other€hand,€contends€that€these€contributionsÏwere€marital€property€because€they€came€from€salary€Mr.€Wilson€earnedÏduring€the€marriage.€€Ms.€Moore€has€the€better€argument.ÌÌà àThe€provision€on€which€Mr.€Wilson€relies€was€intended€to€counteractÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(1)(B)€(1991)€which€states€that€increases€in€theÏvalue€of€separate€property€during€the€marriage€should€be€treated€as€maritalÏproperty€if€each€party€contributed€substantially€to€the€preservation€andÏappreciation€of€the€separate€property.€€Its€evident€purpose€was€to€make€sureÏthat€all€appreciation€in€the€value€of€the€property€that€each€party€owned€priorÏto€the€marriage€would€remain€separate€property€notwithstanding€anyÏð ðcontributionsðð€the€other€party€might€make.€€We€do€not€construe€the€provisionÏto€enable€one€spouse€to€place€property€that€would€otherwise€be€maritalÏproperty€beyond€the€reach€of€the€other€spouse€simply€by€depositing€it€into€anÏaccount€that€existed€prior€to€the€marriage.ÌÌà àMr.€Wilsonððs€contributions€to€his€retirement€accounts€came€directlyÏfrom€the€salary€he€earned€during€the€marriage.€€His€salary€was€not€separateÏproperty€under€either€the€prenuptial€agreement€or€state€law.€€It€was€notÏcovered€by€the€agreement€because€it€was€not€part€of€Mr.€Wilsonððs€premaritalÏestate€and€because€he€did€not€receive€it€by€inheritance€or€gift.€€Likewise,€it€didÏnot€fit€within€the€definition€of€separate€property€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(2)€(1991)€but€rather€was€marital€property€for€the€purposes€of€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(1)(A)€(1991).€€Since€Mr.€Wilsonððs€salary€earnedÏduring€the€marriage€was€marital€property,€Mr.€Wilson€could€not€place€itÏbeyond€Ms.€Mooreððs€reach€simply€by€directing€that€it€be€deposited€into€hisÏseparate€accounts.ÌÌà àWe€have€determined€that€the€$15,949€in€contributions€that€Mr.€WilsonÏmade€to€his€retirement€accounts€during€the€marriage€were€marital€propertyÍsubject€to€division.€€Since€the€abridged€record€does€not€enable€us€to€determineÏhow€much€of€the€investment€income€should€properly€be€attributed€to€theseÏcontributions,€we€have€determined€that€the€$2,646€earned€during€the€marriageÏshould€be€treated€as€Mr.€Wilsonððs€separate€property€in€accordance€with€theÏprenuptial€agreement.€€Accordingly,€we€have€determined€that€Mr.€WilsonÏshould€have€been€awarded€his€retirement€accounts€but€also€that€he€should€haveÏbeen€ordered€to€pay€Ms.€Moore€$7,974.50€in€full€and€complete€settlement€forÏher€interest€in€this€property.ÌÌà@ àò òB.Ìà@ àòòMr.€Wilsonððs€Other€Accountsóóó óÌÌà àMs.€Moore€also€insists€that€she€was€entitled€to€a€portion€of€three€otherÏfinancial€accounts.€€She€claims€that€the€funds€in€these€accounts€are€maritalÏproperty€because€Mr.€Wilson€opened€the€accounts€during€the€marriage.€€WeÏdo€not€agree€that€the€funds€in€these€accounts€are€marital€property€solelyÏbecause€the€accounts€were€opened€during€the€marriage.ÌÌà àMr.€Wilson€testified€without€contradiction€that€the€funds€for€the€threeÏaccounts€in€question€came€from€his€farming€activities,€either€from€theÏinstallment€sale€of€a€portion€of€the€farm€property,€from€the€proceeds€of€theÏsale€of€cattle,€or€from€renting€portions€of€the€farm€land€to€others.€€There€is€noÏdispute€that€Mr.€Wilson€owned€the€farm€prior€to€the€marriage,€and€thus€thatÏthe€funds€in€these€accounts€were€proceeds€from€this€separate€asset.€€Both€theÏprenuptial€agreement€and€the€statute€governing€the€distribution€of€maritalÏproperty€provide€that€property€acquired€in€exchange€for€separate€propertyÏand€income€from€separate€property€remains€separate€property.€€Tenn.€CodeÍAnn.€ðð€36„4„121(b)(2)(B),€„121(b)(2)(C)€(1991).€€Since€the€record€contains€noÏevidence€that€Mr.€Wilson€intended€to€treat€these€assets€as€marital€property,€weÏconcur€with€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€these€accounts€should€be€classifiedÏas€Mr.€Wilsonððs€separate€property.ÌÌà@ àò òIV.Ìà@ àòòThe€Spousal€Support€Awardóóó óÌÌà àBoth€parties€take€issue€with€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€award€Ms.ÏMoore€rehabilitative€alimony€by€directing€Mr.€Wilson€to€provide€her€medicalÏinsurance€for€three€years€or€until€she€remarried€or€became€employed.€€Ms.ÏMoore€asserts€that€she€was€entitled€to€more€spousal€support;€while€Mr.€WilsonÏpredicably€insists€that€Ms.€Moore€was€entitled€to€no€support€at€all.€€We€haveÏdetermined€that€Ms.€Mooreððs€spousal€support€should€be€reduced.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€ignored€the€provision€in€the€prenuptial€agreement€inÏwhich€both€parties€waived€their€right€to€request€spousal€support€if€they€wereÏdivorced.€€Rather€than€relying€on€the€prenuptial€agreement,× ƒ9 ××  ×€Mr.€WilsonÍasserts€that€Ms.€Moore€is€not€entitled€to€spousal€support€under€the€facts€of€thisÏcase€using€the€criteria€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)€(Supp.€1995).€ÏFor€her€part,€Ms.€Moore€asserts€that€she€should€have€received€spousal€supportÏmore€commensurate€with€the€temporary€support€she€was€receiving€prior€toÏthe€divorce.ÌÌà àTrial€courts€exercise€broad€discretion€in€determining€whether€to€awardÏspousal€support€as€well€as€the€amount€and€duration€of€support€if€it€isÏwarranted.€€òòHawkins€v.€Hawkins,óó€883€S.W.2d€622,€625€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);ÏòòLoyd€v.€Loyd,óó€860€S.W.2d€409,€412€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòLuna€v.€Luna,óóÏ718€S.W.2d€673,€675€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986).€€These€decisions€are€guided€byÏthe€factors€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)€and€are€entitled€to€greatÏweight€on€appeal.€€òòBatson€v.€Batson,óó€769€S.W.2d€849,€859€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1988).€€Accordingly,€the€appellate€courts€are€disinclined€to€second„guess€theseÏdecisions€unless€they€are€not€supported€by€the€evidence€or€are€contrary€to€theÏpublic€policies€reflected€in€the€statutes€governing€spousal€support.€€ÌÌà àThe€current€statutes€governing€spousal€support€reflect€a€preference€forÏtemporary€rehabilitative€support€as€opposed€to€long„term€support.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)€(economically€disadvantaged€spouses€should€beÏrehabilitated€whenever€possible).€€The€facts€of€this€case€support€the€trialÏcourtððs€decision€to€provide€Ms.€Moore€with€some€rehabilitative€support,€butÏthey€also€militate€against€the€length€of€support€awarded€by€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àThis€marriage€was€of€relatively€short€duration.€€Ms.€Moore€precipitatedÏthe€divorce.€€She€contributed€comparatively€little€to€the€partiesðð€finances× ƒ: ××  ×€andÏapparently€made€little€other€non„financial€contributions€to€the€marriage.€ÏDuring€the€marriage,€Mr.€Wilson€paid€for€many€of€Ms.€Mooreððs€non„maritalÏexpenses€such€as€a€note€Ms.€Moore€executed€before€the€marriage€and€expensesÏrelating€to€a€home€that€Ms.€Moore€owned€with€her€first€husband.€€He€also€paidÏfor€Ms.€Mooreððs€education€expenses€at€Chattanooga€State€TechnicalÏCommunity€College€and€for€a€portion€of€the€expenses€Ms.€Moore€incurred€toÏsupport€her€children€by€her€first€marriage.€€ÌÌà àWe€have€determined€that€requiring€Mr.€Wilson€to€provide€Ms.€MooreÏwith€medical€insurance€was€a€proper€form€of€rehabilitative€support.€€In€lightÏof€Ms.€Mooreððs€contributions€to€the€marriage,€the€financial€benefits€sheÏreceived€during€the€marriage,€the€amount€of€her€separate€property,€and€theÏfunds€she€received€in€the€division€of€the€marital€property,€we€have€determinedÏthat€Mr.€Wilson€should€be€required€to€provide€Ms.€Moore€with€medicalÏinsurance€for€two€years€from€the€date€of€the€entry€to€the€final€decree€or€untilÏshe€remarries€or€becomes€employed.ÌÌà@ àò òV.ÌÌó óà àWe€affirm€the€portions€of€the€judgment€declaring€the€parties€divorcedÏand€upholding€the€validity€of€their€prenuptial€agreement.€€In€accordance€withÏthis€opinion,€we€remand€the€case€with€directions€to€enter€an€order€directingÏMr.€Wilson€to€pay€Ms.€Moore€$7,974.50€for€her€interest€in€the€marital€estateÍand€to€reduce€the€duration€of€Mr.€Wilsonððs€spousal€support€obligation€fromÏthree€to€two€years.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€in€equal€proportions€toÏHayden€D.€Wilson,€Jr.€and€to€Kathryn€Ann€Moore€and€her€surety,€for€whichÏexecution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€œJUDGE›