ÿWPCœ ´nÚ3£®«¨(öµàPT ú€Hi1Ø¥ŽÄèÄœ\ŒØ ·ŠUµ-ý­CL—®¯ß#>äf3l"ì·H#9·¶ƒ}ùÝGIGSÚyŸ“_¥öH¦ÎðÒ3–ºó.?Í™N—–ý@1¥Bõ^g!îàãì²~2Ö 9Anîzsê*ëk5gëüe @‚ò6w‡tMÃû<_j³¥×®7)áÉN³¯¢ðoòBý%!½+sÔ E¹½Êàcç\*rÖÚ5"”K¶¶ûj”L?_ͧ[¹¬®jKÀp[\âúì/Î¥©©Õãä 3‹‹\™¿™l0B›fIo£ÊϢѳÙÜ~ùyØ£–Ï@¯ü5ýlL3i§r£zY BGgž^(è†E;‰•=\¤vkº¤eħ虢™>R+Sк½f’ˆÜžát¶É+rd:ìx¢Å-þ€Ú}¬šB‚P©©Ÿ¼°¸c‘£qÛ†….ª›C €%ÉüÛð­I ¬TT®kgUp…XWEÿKcLÍè:®Ç¾ãcÀÕ¬Ýyœl'©y\G¸Ï·›Iw“iyÀÁ)Øéy˜p€tÉ~ÚÊ…¬Ž†ä364ØA˵ç.ÊäÙÏiéð!ÿØ•+)b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë U@±NñUNóUNAEb‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ 0ë™™™™ B„„ 0¤¡ D3E D-x 0K¥¥ ASðÆC 0¤  0D­ A«ñ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0»Eƒ4)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularûr') œ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman (ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular- ù-(|G2pÚ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X!DX»»Ô d(|3Î$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Î$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ud»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K4»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼Y»»»Ôà@¦ ¦ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@''%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ  Ðà@òò ìàJanuary€2000€SessionˆÐ Ô$ ÐÔ‡XCµX»¼YÔÌò òÔ#†¼Y»XXCµd#ÔÓ  ÓNANCY€BATMAN€BLOOMòòóó€v.€DOUGLAS€HUGH€BLOOMÔ‡XCµX»¼YÔó óÐ Ò" ÐÓªÓÌà@" " ìàò òA€Direct€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Shelby€CountyˆÐ Ò " Ðà@  ìàNo.€154152€R.D.€€€€€€Kay€S.€Ô_ÔRobilioÔ_Ô,€JudgeˆÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` A߈Ð ‚Ò  ÐÌà@  ìàNo.€W1998„00365„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€September€14,€2000€ˆÐ }Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<T` AßÐ U¥  Ðó óÌThis€is€a€divorce€case.€€The€parties€were€married€for€eighteen€years€and€had€a€fifteen€year€old€son.€Ð P   ÐThe€wife€was€granted€the€divorce.€€The€wife€was€awarded,€òòinter€aliaóó,€the€marital€home€and€the€equityÐ <Œ Ðin€it,€60%€of€the€value€of€various€financial€assets,€her€automobile,€and€various€household€furnishings.€Ð (x ÐCustody€of€the€partiesðð€son€was€awarded€to€the€wife,€and€the€husband€was€granted€supervisedÐ d Ðvisitation.€€The€husband€was€ordered€to€pay€child€support.€€The€wife€was€awarded€60€months€of€Ð P Ðrehabilitative€alimony,€with€the€rate€of€rehabilitative€alimony€to€increase€when€the€husbandððs€childÐ ì< Ðsupport€obligation€ends.€€€The€wifeððs€request€for€attorneyððs€fees€was€denied.€€The€husband€appealsÐ Ø( Ðthe€division€of€the€marital€property€and€the€amount€of€rehabilitative€alimony€awarded.€€€The€wifeÐ Ä Ðappeals€the€denial€of€her€request€for€attorneyððs€fees.€€We€affirm,€finding€that€the€preponderance€ofÐ ° Ðthe€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððs€division€of€the€marital€property,€the€award€of€alimony,€and€theÐ œì Ðdenial€of€the€wifeððs€request€for€attorneyððs€fees.€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌò òà@ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Ô_ÔAppeallÔ_Ô€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€affirmed.ó óˆÐ `° ÐÌòòHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€J.Ô#†¼Y»àXCµä#ÔÔ‡XCµX.¼YÔóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_ÔÐ 8ˆ ÐÔ_ÔW.S.Ô_Ô,óó€and€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó€joined.Ð $ t ÐÌJames€D.€Causey€and€Jean€E.€Markowitz,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Douglas€HughÐ ü!L! ÐBloom.Ð è"8" ÐÌLinda€L.€Holmes,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee,€Nancy€Batman€Bloom.Ð À$ $ ÐÌÓÓà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Y»XXCµ #ÔÔ‡XCµX»¼YԈР˜&è!& ÐÓÓÓ Óà  àIn€this€divorce€case,€Appellant€Douglas€Hugh€Bloom€(ð ðHusbandðð)€and€Appellee€NancyÐ p(À#( ÐBatman€Bloom€(ð ðWifeðð)€€married€on€June€6,€1980.€€It€was€the€second€marriage€for€both.€€The€partiesÐ \)¬$) Ðhad€one€child,€a€son,€Jeffrey,€who€was€fifteen€at€the€time€of€trial.€€Husband€is€a€financial€consultantÐ H*˜%* Ðwith€Smith„Barney.€€During€the€marriage,€Wife€was€a€full„time€homemaker.Ð 4+„&+ ÐÐ   -\(-ý Ðà  àThe€parties€separated€on€December€6,€1996.€€Wife€filed€a€complaint€for€divorce€on€DecemberÐ ° Ð17,€1996,€citing€irreconcilable€differences€and€Husbandððs€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€(R,€2)Ð œì ÐHusband€filed€an€answer€and€cross„complaint€for€divorce,€alleging€irreconcilable€differences€andÐ ˆØ ÐWifeððs€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€Wife€later€amended€her€complaint,€alleging€that€Husband€wasÐ tÄ Ðguilty€of€adultery.€€Ð `° Ðà  àA€four€day€bench€trial€on€the€matter€was€held€from€August€4€through€August€7,€1997.€€PriorÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€trial,€Husband€stipulated€to€inappropriate€marital€conduct€and€adultery.€€The€partiesðð€son,€Jeffrey,Ð $ t Ðhad€been€diagnosed€with€attention€deficit€disorder€and€hyperactivity€(ADHD),€and€a€substantialÐ  ` Ðamount€of€time€at€trial€was€spent€on€testimony€regarding€Jeffreyððs€special€needs.€€Substantial€trialÐ ü L  Ðtime€was€also€spent€on€Wifeððs€allegations€that€Husband€had€dissipated€marital€assets€on€hisÐ è 8  Ðparamour,€in€violation€of€a€court€order.Ô#†¼Y»XXCµ] #ÔÔ‡XCµX»¼YÔÐ Ô$  Ðà  àAt€trial,€Husband€testified€that€he€has€a€bachelorððs€degree€in€marketing€and€a€masterððs€degreeÐ ¬ü  Ðin€business€administration.€€At€the€time€of€trial,€he€had€been€a€financial€consultant€with€Smith„Ð ˜è  ÐBarney€for€€ten€years.€€His€income€for€the€first€seven€months€of€1997€was€$96,614.35.€€His€taxÐ „Ô  Ðreturns€from€the€previous€three€years€indicated€a€gross€annual€income€in€1996€of€$139,968,€$121,816Ð pÀ Ðin€1995,€and€$103,802€in€1994.€€Husband€acknowledged€that€Wife€had€been€a€homemaker€sinceÐ \¬ Ðshortly€before€Jeffrey€was€born,€and€that€she€had€not€worked€outside€the€home.€€Husband€admittedÐ H˜ Ðseveral€instances€of€ð ðinappropriate€behaviorðð€€with€Jeffrey,€in€which€he€had€lost€his€temper€and€beenÐ 4„ Ðphysically€violent€with€him.€€Husband€testified€that€Jeffreyððs€ADHD€made€him€a€€ð ðdifficultðð€child.Ð  p ÐHusband€said€that€he€also€has€ADHD.€€He€testified€that€it€enabled€him€to€sympathize€with€JeffreyððsÐ  \ Ðproblems,€but€also€implied€it€caused€him€to€more€easily€lose€patience€with€his€son.€€HusbandÐ øH Ðadmitted€that€he€had€€given€Jeffrey€over„the„counter€steroids,€despite€Wifeððs€objections.€Ð ä4 Ѐà  àWife€testified€that€she€worked€for€a€brief€period€after€the€parties€married,€but€quit€work€whenÐ ¼  Ðshe€was€pregnant€with€Jeffrey,€and€had€been€a€homemaker€for€the€remainder€of€the€marriage.€€OverÐ ¨ø Ðtwenty„five€years€ago,€she€earned€two€and€one„half€years€of€college€credit.€€Wife€testified€that€sheÐ ”ä Ðwas€pre„admitted€to€the€University€of€Memphis,€but€did€not€yet€know€if€any€of€her€prior€college€workÐ €Ð Ðcould€be€applied€towards€her€degree.€€She€said€that€she€intended€to€major€in€paralegal€studies,€andÐ l¼ Ðhoped€to€eventually€attend€law€school.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð X ¨ Ðà  àOn€August€20,€1997€the€trial€court€granted€Wife€a€divorce€on€the€grounds€of€HusbandððsÐ 0"€  Ðinappropriate€marital€conduct€and€adultery.€€Husbandððs€cross„complaint€for€divorce€was€dismissed.€Ð #l! ÐAll€other€matters€were€reserved€until€several€months€later.€€On€October€27,€1997,€the€trial€courtÐ $X" Ðissued€the€final€decree€of€divorce.€€Over€one€year€later,€on€December€4,€1998,€the€trial€court€issuedÐ ô$D # Ðan€amended€final€decree€of€divorce.€€The€amended€final€decree€awarded€Wife,€òòinter€aliaóó,€the€maritalÐ à%0!$ Ðhome,€with€equity€of€approximately€$39,000;€sixty€percent€of€the€value€of€Husbandððs€pension€planÐ Ì&"% Ðwith€his€employer;€sixty€percent€of€the€value€of€all€IRAððs,€401ks€and€joint€accounts,€with€a€combinedÐ ¸'#& Ðvalue€of€approximately€$71,000;€her€1995€Mazda,€worth€approximately€$8,000;€Husbandððs€guns;Ð ¤(ô#' Ðand€various€household€furnishings€in€the€marital€home.€€Ô#†¼Y»XXCµR#ÔÔ‡XCµX»¼YÔCustody€of€the€partiesðð€son€was€granted€toÐ )à$( ÐWife,€and€Husband€was€awarded€supervised€visitation,€on€a€schedule€to€be€based€upon€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðrecommendation€of€Jeffreyððs€€health€care€professionals.€€Husband€was€ordered€to€pay€Wife€childÐ h+¸&* Ðsupport€of€$1,950€per€month.€€Husband€was€ordered€to€pay€Wife€rehabilitative€alimony€for€a€periodÐ ° Ðof€60€months.€€The€rate€of€rehabilitative€alimony€was€set€at€$2,500€per€month€during€the€time€inÐ œì Ðwhich€Husband€was€obligated€to€pay€child€support.€€When€Husbandððs€child€support€obligationÐ ˆØ Ðended,€the€amount€of€Wifeððs€rehabilitative€alimony€would€automatically€increase€to€$4,000€perÐ tÄ Ðmonth.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€states:Ð `° Ðà8  àà ` àDefendant€shall€pay€to€Plaintiff€as€rehabilitative€alimony€the€sum€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ð$2,500.00€per€month€to€be€paid€by€automatic€bank€deposit€by€the€fifteenth€(15òòthóó)€dayÐ $ t Ðof€each€and€every€month,€commencing€October€15,€1997,€until€the€partiesðð€minorÐ  ` Ðchild€reaches€the€age€of€18€and€his€class€graduates€from€High€School€whicheverÐ ü L  Ðoccurs€last.€€The€first€month€after€Defendantððs€obligation€to€pay€child€support€ceases,Ð è 8  ÐDefendant€shall€pay€Plaintiff€the€sum€of€$4,000€per€month€as€rehabilitative€alimony.€Ð Ô$  ÐSaid€payments€of€rehabilitative€alimony€shall€continue€for€a€total€period€of€sixty€(60)Ð À  Ðmonths€from€October€1,€1997,€unless€Defendant€dies,€Plaintiff€dies€or€remarries,Ð ¬ü  Ðwhichever€shall€occur€first,€in€which€event€Defendantððs€obligation€to€payÐ ˜è  Ðrehabilitative€alimony€for€sixty€(60)€months€shall€terminate.€Ð„Ô Ð Ð  ÐEach€party€was€ordered€to€assume€responsibility€for€his€or€her€own€attorneyððs€fees.€€Husband€wasÐ \¬ Ðordered€to€pay€the€court€costs.€€Ô#†¼Y»XXCµ{#ÔÔ€XCµX»¼YÔFrom€this€order,€Husband€and€Wife€now€appeal.Ð H˜ Ðà  àOn€appeal,€Husband€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€division€of€the€marital€estate,€€inÐ  p Ðnot€ordering€that€the€marital€home€be€sold,€and€in€its€award€of€alimony.€€Wife€appeals€the€trialÐ  \ Ðcourtððs€denial€of€her€request€for€attorneyððs€fees.€€We€first€address€Husbandððs€issues€on€appeal.Ð øH Ðà  àHusband€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€division€of€the€marital€estate,€and€in€notÐ Ð  Ðordering€that€the€marital€home€be€sold.€€He€contends€that€awarding€Wife€òòóóthe€marital€home€and€60Ð ¼  Ðpercent€of€the€value€of€Husbandððs€pension€plan€and€various€other€accounts€is€inequitable.€€HusbandÐ ¨ø Ðpoints€out€that€Wife€is€in€good€health,€was€only€44€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial,€and€had€two€and€one„Ð ”ä Ðhalf€years€of€college€credit.€€He€asserts€that€ð ðneither€party€has€any€more€ability€to€earn€capital€assetsÐ €Ð Ðthan€the€other,ðð€and€contends€that€the€assets€should€have€been€divided€more€evenly.€€€Husband€alsoÐ l¼ Ðargues€that€the€trial€court€should€have€ordered€that€the€marital€home€be€sold.€€Husband€asserts€thatÐ X ¨ Ðthe€home€is€too€large€for€two€people,€and€that€its€mortgage€of€$1,445.84€unnecessarily€raises€WifeððsÐ D!” Ðliving€expenses.€€€€Husband€contends€that€ð ðit€is€impracticable€for€Husband€to€support€theÐ 0"€  Ðmaintenance€of€the€home,€which€he€is€doing€with€child€support€and€alimony,€and€support€himself.ðð€Ð #l! ÐIn€the€alternative,€Husband€seeks€an€order€that€Wife€be€required€to€sell€the€marital€home€uponÐ $X" ÐJeffreyððs€graduation€from€high€school,€and€that€the€proceeds€be€divided€equally€between€the€parties,Ð ô$D # Ðbased€upon€the€equity€in€the€home€at€the€time€of€the€divorce.€Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àWife€argues€that€the€trial€courtððs€division€of€the€marital€property€was€equitable,€given€theÐ ¸'#& Ðlong€duration€of€the€marriage€and€the€partiesðð€differing€vocational€skills.€€She€notes€that€she€has€notÐ ¤(ô#' Ðworked€since€before€Jeffrey€was€born,€and€has€not€had€any€vocational€training€or€education€since€sheÐ )à$( Ðattended€college€over€twenty„five€years€ago.€€Wife€asserts€that€she€substantially€contributed€to€the€Ð  |*Ì%) Ðaccumulation€of€marital€property,€through€her€role€as€homemaker.€€€Wife€maintains€that€the€trialÐ ° Ðcourt€did€not€err€by€awarding€her€the€marital€home.Ð œì Ðà  àÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔIn€dividing€the€marital€property€in€a€divorce,€the€trial€court€is€afforded€wide€discretion,€andÐ tÄ Ðits€distribution€will€be€given€ð ðgreat€weightðð€on€appeal.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€ò òòòFord€v.€Fordó óóó,€952€S.W.2d€824,€825Ð ^® Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€Unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€division€of€theÐ H ˜ Ðproperty,€the€trial€courtððs€decision€will€not€be€disturbed€on€appeal.€ò òòòSee€Dunlap€v.€Dunlapóóó ó,€996Ð 2 ‚ ÐS.W.2d€803,€814€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);€Ô_ÔTenn.R.App.P.Ô_Ô€13(d).Ð  l Ðà  àAlthough€the€trial€court€is€to€divide€marital€property€equitably,€an€equitable€division€need€notÐ ð @  Ðbe€an€equal€division.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€ò òòòBookout€v.€Bookoutó óóó,€954€S.W.2d€730,€732€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997).Ô#†XCµX XX‰ 52#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔòòò ò€Ô#†XCµX XX‰ Ý5#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔSeeÐ Ú *  Ðalso€Fordó óóó,€952€S.W.2d€at€825€(noting€that€equitable€division€of€marital€property€does€not€necessarilyÐ Ä  Ðmean€an€equal€division€of€property).€€Guidelines€for€the€equitable€division€of€marital€property€areÐ ®þ  Ðset€forth€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„4„121€(c)€(1996).€€Among€the€factors€the€trial€court€is€to€considerÐ ˜è  Ðin€its€division€of€property€are:Ð ‚Ò  Ðà8  àà ` à(1)€The€duration€of€the€marriage;ÐV¦Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(2)€The€age,€physical€and€mental€health,€vocational€skills,€employability,Ð *z Ðearning€capacity,€estate,€financial€liabilities€and€financial€needs€of€each€of€the€parties;ÐdÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(3)€The€tangible€or€intangible€contribution€by€one€(1)€party€to€the€education,Ð è8 Ðtraining,€or€increased€earning€power€of€the€other€party;ÐÒ"Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(4)€The€relative€ability€of€each€party€for€future€acquisitions€of€€capital€assetsÐ ¦ö Ðand€income;ÐàÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(5)€The€contribution€of€each€party€to€the€acquisition,€preservation,Ð d´ Ðappreciation€or€dissipation€of€the€marital€property€or€separate€property,€including€theÐ Nž Ðcontribution€of€a€party€as€homemaker,€wage€earner€or€parent,€with€the€contributionÐ 8ˆ Ðof€a€party€as€homemaker€or€wage€earner€to€be€given€the€same€weight€if€each€party€hasÐ " r Ðfulfilled€its€role;Ð !\Ð Ð  Ðà8  à*€*€*€*Ðà"0!Ð Ð  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð36„4„121(c)€(1996).Ð ´$ # Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€parties€had€been€married€since€1980.€€During€the€fourteen€years€precedingÐ ˆ&Ø!% Ðthe€partiesðð€separation,€Wife€functioned€solely€as€a€homemaker.€€Husband€acknowledged€that€WifeÐ r'Â"& Ðhad€fulfilled€her€duties€in€that€role,€as€well€as€managing€the€household,€paying€all€bills€and€assumingÐ \(¬#' Ðthe€responsibility€for€the€home.€€Without€a€college€degree,€vocational€training,€or€any€workÐ F)–$( Ðexperience€for€the€previous€sixteen€years,€it€is€beyond€question€that€Wife€has€€less€ability€to€acquireÐ 0*€%) Ðassets€in€the€future€than€does€Husband,€a€successful€financial€planner€whose€income€for€the€firstÐ +j&* Ðseven€months€of€1997€was€over€$97,000.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€find€no€abuse€of€discretionÐ ,T'+ Ðin€the€trial€courtððs€division€of€the€marital€estate,€including€the€award€of€the€marital€home€to€Wife.€Ð ° Ðà  àHusband€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€its€award€of€rehabilitative€alimony.€€HusbandÐ „Ô Ðcontends€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€ordering€that€€Husbandððs€rehabilitative€alimonyÐ n¾ Ðobligation€automatically€increase€from€$2,500€to€$4,000€per€month€once€his€obligation€to€pay€childÐ X¨ Ðsupport€ends.€Ð B ’ Ðà  àÔ#†XCµX XX‰ &6#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔThe€trial€court€is€afforded€wide€discretion€concerning€the€award€of€alimony,€and€the€alimonyÐ  f Ðaward€should€be€reversed€only€in€instances€in€which€this€discretion€ð ðhas€manifestly€been€abused.ðð€Ð  P Ðò òòòHanover€v.€Hanoveró óóó,€775€S.W.2d€612,€617€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€ò òòòó óóóThe€trial€court€has€ð ðbroadÐ ê :  Ðdiscretionðð€€to€determine€the€amount,€nature,€and€duration€of€alimony.€€ò òòòKinard€v.€Kinardóóó ó,€986Ð Ô $  ÐS.W.2d€220,€234€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€Guidelines€for€the€determination€of€alimony€are€set€forthÐ ¾  Ðin€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€36„5„101(d)€(Supp.€1999).€Ô#†XCµX XX‰ ¤B#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔ€ð ðWhile€there€is€no€absolute€formula€forÐ ¨ø  Ðdetermining€the€amount€of€alimony,€ððthe€real€need€of€the€spouse€seeking€the€support€is€the€singleÐ ’â  Ðmost€important€factor.ðð€ðð€ò òòòAaron€v.€Aaronóóó ó,€909€S.W.2d€408,€410€(Tenn.€1995)€(quoting€ò òòòÔ_ÔCranfordÔ_ÔÐ |Ì  Ðv.€Ô_ÔCranfordÔ_Ôóóó ó,€772€S.W.2d€48,€50€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€Another€key€consideration€is€the€ability€toÐ f¶  Ðpay€of€the€obligor€spouse.€€ò òòòSee€Anderton€v.€Ô_ÔAndertonÔ_Ôóóó ó,€988€S.W.2d€675,€683€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).Ô#†XCµX XX‰ E#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔÐ P  Ðà  àIn€this€case,€Husbandððs€average€€monthly€net€income€was€$9,566ò òó ó,€while€Wife€has€no€monthlyÐ $t Ðincome€outside€the€support€received€from€Husband.€€Wife€has€few€vocational€skills,€and€littleÐ ^ Ðexperience€in€the€job€market.€€At€trial,€Wife€indicated€her€intent€to€complete€her€college€degree,€andÐ øH Ðpossibly€attend€law€school.€€Clearly€Wife€has€a€need€for€rehabilitative€alimony,€and€Husband€has€theÐ â2 Ðability€to€pay€the€amount€of€rehabilitative€alimony€awarded.€Ð Ì Ðà  àHusband€argues€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€ordering€that€Wifeððs€rehabilitativeÐ  ð Ðalimony€automatically€increase€from€$2,500€to€$4,000€per€month€when€Husbandððs€obligation€to€payÐ ŠÚ Ðchild€support€ends.€€However,€Husbandððs€ability€to€pay€alimony€ð ðis€directly€affected€by€theÐ tÄ Ðtermination€of€his€child€support€obligation.€€His€ability€to€pay€increases€once€he€is€no€longer€obligedÐ ^® Ðto€pay€child€support.ðð€€ò òòòErwin€v.€Erwinó óóó,€No.€W1998„00801„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2000€WL€987339,€at€*2Ð H˜ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€26,€2000).€€ò òó óUnder€these€circumstances,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€trial€courtÐ 2‚ Ðabused€its€discretion€in€requiring€Husband€to€pay€additional€rehabilitative€alimony€when€he€is€noÐ  l Ðlonger€obliged€to€pay€child€support.€€Accordingly,€the€award€of€alimony€is€affirmed.Ð !V Ðà  àWife€argues€on€appeal€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€her€request€for€attorneyððs€fees.€Ð Ú"*! ÐWife€argues€that€the€assets€she€was€awarded€in€the€divorce,€namely,€portions€of€Husbandððs€401k€andÐ Ä#" Ðother€retirement€accounts,€cannot€easily€be€liquidated€to€pay€her€attorneyððs€fees.€€Wife€asserts€thatÐ ®$þ# Ðshe€needs€the€assets€she€was€awarded€in€order€to€fund€her€retirement€and€€ð ðsecure€[her]€future€untilÐ ˜%è $ Ðshe€can€earn€a€living.ðð€€Wife€also€argues€that€Husbandððs€ð ðdifficult€behaviorðð€unnecessarily€increasedÐ ‚&Ò!% Ðher€attorneyððs€fees.€€Wife€contends€that€Husband€€refused€pre„trial€requests€for€documents,€andÐ l'¼"& Ðdenied€the€existence€of€certain€records€that€he€later€produced€at€trial.Ð V(¦#' ÐÐ  **z%) Ðà  àAn€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€in€a€divorce€is€considered€to€be€an€award€of€alimony.€€ò òòòLong€v.Ð ° ÐLongó óóó,€957€S.W.2d€825,€829€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997).€€As€with€alimony,€a€trial€court€has€broadÐ šê Ðdiscretion€regarding€the€award€or€denial€of€attorneyððs€fees,€and€it€will€not€be€reversed€ð ðexcept€uponÐ „Ô Ða€clear€showing€of€abuse€of€that€discretion.ðð€€ò òòòAaron€v.€Aaronóóó ó,€909€S.W.2d€408,€411€(Tenn.€1995)Ð n¾ Ð(citing€ò òòòStorey€v.€Storeyóóó ó,€835€S.W.2d€593,€597€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992)€and€ò òòòCrouch€v.€Crouchóóó ó,€385Ð X¨ ÐS.W.2d€288,€293€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1964)).€Ô#†XCµX XX‰ \H#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔÐ B ’ Ðà  àIn€this€case,€in€addition€to€the€marital€home,€Wife€was€awarded€60€percent€of€variousÐ  f Ðfinancial€assets,€including€bank€accounts.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€do€not€conclude€that€theÐ  P Ðtrial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€ordering€that€each€party€be€responsible€for€his€or€her€ownÐ ê :  Ðattorneyððs€fees.€€Therefore,€the€trial€courtððs€decision€is€affirmed€on€this€issue.€Ð Ô $  Ðà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€equally€to€the€Appellant,Ð ¨ø  ÐDouglas€Hugh€Bloom,€and€the€Appellee,€Nancy€Batman€Bloom,€and€their€sureties,€for€whichÐ ’â  Ðexecution€may€issue,€if€necessary.à h àÔ#†XCµX XX‰ åT#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔÐ |Ì  Ðà  àÌÓ Óà8  àÔ#†XCµX XX‰ 'X#ÔÔ‡X‰ XXXCµÔà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ$tÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð ^ ÐÌò òòòóóó óÔ#†XCµX XX‰ «X#Ô