ÿWPC­ ¦࿤c·¥3g³1#ØaqzÁù›#®¼#€bUúi=€¡W3¬¿X±à žh*7jÌò¦mfUŒÄO¨é: PJ#m³]%g/]ilÇ£!=#ß…eª°DŠÎ©dÖ„Æq’ÕÒuPAEàµJLóñvòMÄÆ?o7›uÖsð`’ûG s.§®°ŠÁ¨A›ºîÃÈ®9nØm ‡Eus…væö¸„‹½3Ûqå”Í¡ÿ†ÜKå¶â8Ä(e³Ô´U³Z}%Îã\˜_W]Z1RAx¯½GÊK®)“‘iÎ[U>f2IÙ-¬¡ŠX `×CK… Mzگܺ¡;ÞË»LõóyK48%Uáab©‡>«2˜M¾¯XísH‚!îEîGÔhVÁ/òýØÀƒ`‹@¨ /¯þÌoý7f“·ßÔ}·ÃˆœæÂ$ÃÇË$2+qá©÷I‚-\}ÞÐÀï ½¤[w®²„·´GÖÚÖH¸ ”Âë«Ãø£<ð•²óÿì!ò¯Ö}¥Ð4•·¤z~˜Ìµ’l apգ‚@ý%.#}³(+”‘’øðÉ ¬†±œ–$g”D½(Êí‚«U“§õââÆç`à^“î]• Å wЊ)# >UNI %— 0(Åw@Í4 !x0 0l¨ 0D ’X Æê ° Õ¶ u‹U×U*,U:V*U:ººººººººº AQô BE 0Db 0D¦ 0Dêê D/.. B] D3z˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ` a b c d£efgÓ€svn~<$ ® 3|xv nÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝFollowing€ò òòòBloomv.€Illinoisó óóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€federalÐ ° Ðconstitution€did€not€guarantee€a€jury€trial€to€defendants€charged€with€criminal€contempt€inÏTennessee€because€the€maximum€penalty€was€ten€days€and,€thus,€criminal€contempt€in€TennesseeÏwas€considered€a€petty€offense.€€ò òòòDykev.€Taylor€Implement€Mfg.€Co.ó óóó,€391€U.S.€216,€219„20Ð €Ð Ð(1968).€€The€Court€also€noted€that€a€sentence€as€long€as€six€months€would€qualify€the€criminalÏcontempt€as€merely€a€petty€offense.€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€at€220.€€Our€analysis€of€the€Husbandððs€right€to€a€jury€trialÐ ` ° Ðin€this€case,€therefore,€is€predicated€on€the€right€to€jury€trial€provision€found€in€the€TennesseeÏConstitution.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Const.€art.I,€ðð6.((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ˆÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€manifest€necessity€exists€ð ðonly€when€there€is€no€feasible€and€just€alternative€to€haltingÐ ° Ðthe€proceedings.ðð€€ò òòòStatev.€Mounceó óóó,€859€S.W.2d€at€322.€€We€are€unable€to€discern€any€necessityÐ  ð Ðfor€the€Division5€judgeððs€decision€to€transfer€this€case€back€to€Division8.ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5H ËÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€holding€is€consistent€with€rule€23€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,Ð ° Ðwhich€provides€that,€ð ð[i]n€all€criminal€cases€except€small€offenses,€trial€shall€be€by€jury€unlessÏthe€defendant€waives€a€jury€trial€in€writing€with€the€approval€of€the€court€and€the€consent€of€theÏdistrict€attorney€general.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.23.€€In€Tennessee,€the€term€ð ðsmall€offenseððÏtraditionally€has€been€defined€ð ðas€one€in€which€the€punishment€cannot€exceed€a€fine€of€$50.00Ïand€which€carries€no€confinement€in€a€jail€or€workhouse.ðð€€ò òòòBrownv.€Lathamó óóó,€914€S.W.2d€887,Ð ` ° Ð889€(Tenn.€1996). kÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€addition€to€showing€that€the€Husband€failed€to€pay€his€share€of€the€partiesðð€sonððsÐ ° Ðorthodontic€expenses,€the€evidence€at€trial€revealed€that€the€Husband€failed€to€pay€his€share€of€theÏchildrenððs€tuition€for€the€school€years€1993„94,€1994„95,€1995„96,€and€1996„97.€ KÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€recognize€that€the€Husbandððs€corporation,€M.S.I.,€was€jointly€and€severally€liable€forÐ ° Ðthe€alimony€obligation€to€the€Wife€and€that€the€Husbandððs€personal€bankruptcy€did€notÏextinguish€the€corporationððs€liability.€€At€trial,€however,€no€evidence€was€introduced€to€show€thatÏthe€corporation€had€the€ability€to€satisfy€the€obligation.€€To€the€contrary,€the€Husband€testifiedÏthat€the€corporation€was€losing€money€and€that€the€I.R.S.€had€filed€tax€liens€against€theÏcorporationððs€assets.€€ ÍÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€its€judgment€of€contempt,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€the€MDA€ð ðspeaks€for€itselfðð€andÐ ° Ðthat€ð ðall€payments€required€of€[the€Husband]€to€[the€Wife]€as€alimony€òòò òin€solidoó óóó€are€deemed€to€beÐ  ð Ðnecessary€and€reasonable€support€and€maintenance.ðð€€Neither€party€challenges€the€trial€courtððsÏruling€that€this€obligation€constituted€support€and€maintenance.€€We€note,€however,€that€theÏMDAððs€description€of€the€obligation€was€not€determinative€of€the€nature€of€the€debt€or€itsÏdischargeability€in€the€subsequent€bankruptcy€proceedings.€€ò òòòLeMastersv.€Rossó óóó,€No.Ð ` ° Ð01A01-9702-CV-00070,€1997€WL€717237,€at€*3€(Tenn.€App.€Nov.19,€1997)€(citing€ò òòòIn€reÐ P   ÐChismó óóó,€169€B.R.€163,€169€(Bankr.€W.D.€Tenn.€1994));€ò òòòIn€re€Presleró óóó,€34€B.R.€895,€897€(Bankr.Ð @  ÐM.D.€Tenn.€1983). Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X3XXXÔÔ€¬EXX3ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X3X¬EÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€16,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôcüôXX3ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X3XXXÔÔ€¬EXX3ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X3X¬EÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€11,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôcüôXX3ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ d(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñgñ›ñgñÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ'°,X°À”X°œX'Óò òñsññgñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrßñgññsññvññsñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` ttx$°ð Õrßñsññvññvññvññvññgñ›ñgññvññvññvññvñ›ñvññvññvññvñ›ñvññvñßt€(>.*jxgK` `€€@E/û` ttx$g°ð  tß›ñvñà@O O ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€ˆÌà@kk%ìàAT€JACKSONó óˆÐ œì ÐÌà@. . ìà_______________________________________________________ˆÌÌà À à)Ìò òDOROTHY€JANE€AHERN€(PIEROTTI)ó óà À à)à  àShelby€County€Circuit€Court€Ð 8 ˆ Ðà À à)à  àNo.€134593€R.D.Ð ( x Ѐ€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee.à À à)Ð  d Ðà À à)ÌVS.à À à)à  àC.A.€No.€02A01„9708„CV„00190Ð ì <  Ðà À à)Ìò òROBERT€FRANCES€AHERNó ó,à À à)Ð Ä  Ðà À à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellant.à À à)Ð  ð  Ðà À à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Circuit€Court€of€Shelby€County€at€Memphis.Ìò òHonorable€DððArmy€Bailey,€Judge€ó óÐ <Œ ÐÌÌÌò òJohn€R.€Candyó ó,€Collierville,€TennesseeÐ ì< Ðò òGarland€œErgudenó ó,›€Memphis,€TennesseeÐ Ü, ÐAttorneys€for€Defendant/Appellant.ÌÌÌò òRobert€A.€Wampleró ó,€Memphis,€TennesseeÐ à ÐAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌœò òAFFIRMED€IN›€PART,€œREVERSED€IN›€PART€AND€REMANDEDó óÐ %X # ÐÌÌà À àò òFARMER,€J.ó óÐ Ì'#& ÐÌò òCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ð ¤)ô$( Ðò òLILLARD,€J.ó ó:€œ(Concurs)Ð ”*ä%) ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ 0;€6; Ðñ_ñ›ñaññ`ñÓ3°,X°` À”X°,X°À”X3Óñ`ññaññbññañÓ6°,X°` ¸ À”X°,X°À”X6ÓñaññbññcññbñÓ6°,X°` ‚XÀ”X°,X°À”X6ÓñbññcññcñÓ0°,X°` ˜X°,X°À”X0ÓñcññdñÓ  ÓñdññeñÓÓœñeññfñà ` àDefendant€Robert€Francis€Ahern€(the€Husband)€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€judgmentÏfinding€the€Husband€guilty€of€multiple€counts€of€criminal€contempt€for€failing€to€pay€the€alimonyÏand€child€support€obligations€set€forth€in€the€courtððs€final€divorce€decree.€€We€affirm€in€part€andÏreverse€in€part€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.ÌÌà@QQìàÔ& € Ôòòò òI.€€Factual€and€Procedural€Historyó óóóˆÐ è 8  ÐÌà ` àThe€parties€were€divorced€in€June€1993.€€The€final€divorceÔ'€è H Ô€decree,€which€incorporatedÏthe€provisions€of€the€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement(MDA),€awarded€Plaintiff/AppelleeÏDorothy€Jane€Ahern€Pierotti€(the€Wife)€exclusive€custody€of€the€partiesðð€two€minor€children.€€TheÏHusband€agreed€to€pay€child€support€in€the€amount€of€$1,346.88€per€month€and€to€furnish€the€WifeÏcopies€of€his€canceled€payroll€checks€and€payroll€ledger€on€a€quarterly€basis.€€The€Husband€alsoÏagreed€to€pay€88.5%€of€(1)the€childrenððs€private€school€tuition,€books,€and€registration€and€(2)theÏchildrenððs€ð ðuninsured€health€related€care€costs.ðð€€Per€the€MDA,€the€final€divorce€decree€required€theÏHusband€to€pay€various€amounts€to€the€Wife€as€alimony€ò òòòin€solidoó óóó,€including€but€not€limited€to€theÐ xÈ Ðfollowing€amount:ÌÌÓÓà8 ` à14.à ¸ àThe€husband€shall€pay€the€wife€the€sum€of€$32,500€as€alimonyÐ $P" Ðò òòòin€solidoó óóó€for€her€support€and€maintenance.€€This€same€shall€incurÐ ì$< # Ðinterest€at€8%€simple€annual€interest€compounded€annually.€€TheÏpayments€shall€be€at€the€rate€of€$1000€per€month,€principal€andÏinterest€beginning€on€the€òòLASTóó€day€of€òòMARCHóó,€1993,€and€on€theÐ °'#& Ðsame€date€thereafter€until€paid.€€This€sum€shall€not€be€deductible€forÏtax€purposes€by€the€husband€nor€includible€in€the€wifeððs€income€forÏtax€purposes.€€Interest€begins€on€3/9/93.€€This€judgment€shall€also€beÏagainst€M.S.I.€jointly€and€severally.€€No€prepayment€penalty.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓÌM.S.I.€referred€to€Management€Systems,€Incorporated.€€The€Husband€owned€all€of€M.S.I.ððs€stock€andÏserved€as€its€president.ÌÌà ` àIn€November€1996,€the€Wife€filed€a€petition€for€writ€of€ò òòòscire€faciasóóó ó€in€which€sheÐ ˜4è/4 Ðsought€to€have€the€Husband€held€in€contempt€for€his€willful€and€intentional€violations€of€theÏforegoing€support€provisions€of€the€final€divorce€decree.€€The€petition€alleged€that€the€Husband€hadÏfiled€a€bankruptcy€petition€in€which€he€sought€to€discharge€the€alimony€debt€to€the€Wife€but€that€theÏdebt€was€determined€to€be€nondischargeable.€€The€Wife€later€amended€her€petition€to€ask€that€theÐ ø;H7< ÐHusband€be€held€in€both€civil€and€criminal€contempt,€and€she€filed€a€notice€that€she€was€seeking€toÏhave€the€Husband€held€in€contempt€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sections€16-1-103€andÏ29-9-101€through€29-9-104.ÌÌà ` àThe€Husband€filed€an€answer€in€which€he€asserted€that€many€of€the€described€debtsÏto€the€Wife€had€been€discharged€at€the€conclusion€of€his€bankruptcy€action.€€The€Wife€responded€byÏagain€amending€her€petition,€this€time€to€ask€the€trial€court€to€make€a€determination€as€to€theÏdischargeability€of€the€debts€pursuant€to€an€order€of€the€Bankruptcy€Court€for€the€Western€DistrictÏof€Tennessee;€however,€the€bankruptcy€courtððs€order€does€not€appear€in€the€€record.€€ÌÌà ` àPrior€to€trial,€the€case€was€transferred€from€Division8€to€Division5€of€the€CircuitÏCourt€for€the€Thirtieth€Judicial€District.€€Although€the€Husband€previously€had€demanded€a€jury€trial,Ïhe€announced€that€he€would€waive€his€right€to€a€jury€trial€if€Division5€would€accept€the€transfer€ofÏthe€case€and€conduct€a€trial€on€all€of€the€issues€pending€in€this€litigation.€€Thereafter,€the€Division5Ïtrial€judge€proceeded€to€conduct€a€bench€trial€on€the€Wifeððs€contempt€petition.€€Partway€through€theÏtrial,€however,€the€trial€judge,€apparently€ò òòòsua€sponteó óóó,€announced€that€she€was€transferring€the€caseÐ °"  Ðback€to€Division8.€€The€trial€judge€announced€that:ÌÌÓÓà8 ` àThis€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€post„divorce€matters,€especially€inÏa€situation€such€as€this€one,€are€more€properly€heard€by€the€judge€whoÏheard€the€divorce,€and€this„„€and€Division5€is€transferring€this€backÏto€Division8,€which€is€now€in€a€posture€to€accommodate€the€parties.€ÏÐ ` x` x ÐÓÓÌThe€transfer€followed€arguments€by€counsel€for€the€parties€concerning€the€need€to€interpret€theÏprovisions€of€the€MDA€in€order€to€determine€the€dischargeability€of€the€debts€to€the€Wife.€€ÌÌà ` àNeither€party€objected€to€the€transfer€back€to€Division8.€€When€the€proceedingsÏresumed€in€Division8,€however,€the€Husband€contended€that€jeopardy€had€attached€in€the€trialÏbefore€Division5€and€that€double€jeopardy€principles€prevented€his€retrial€in€Division8.€€The€trialÏcourt€rejected€this€argument,€ruling€that€the€Husband€had€waived€his€double€jeopardy€argument€byÏfailing€to€raise€an€objection€in€Division5.€€The€Husband€then€renewed€his€demand€for€a€jury€trial,Ð