WPC4= pgpv徜!Rcpcl4H:1\fڟ<E(7#*~ lkɶ2?h.Ɣ@1} FDl-U͘GpϬ}!lM7RL" 1NmƝӐP|8ӨnoY,5!X UJ-c %j^ p 0|U*NwR4Vj zy m 0 0   O  0N 0 0E 0 0 0g 0F 0" 0 0 0 0 0n 0A 0 0 0 0 0g 0B 0 0 0! 0" 0\# 00%$bU$ 0<]$ 0$ 0>W% 0v% 0` & 0`k& 0`& 0`+' 0`' 08' 0#( 02( 0') 0;:#* 0Y]* 0_* 0 + 0j, 0- B* / D/7/ 0f/ D/0 01 061 02 0:%3 0^_3 0<3 0N3U6G4U>}4U*44 0D5 066#7UN8 B99 019 D39 D-: 0K5:5: AS:: 0; 0D=< A<,=]-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular|&-:i+00 3|x 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.wptU2J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  ӁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal- -<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1   XXX   (&H2 XXX (&H3 XXX (&H4 XXX XXX(&H5 XXX (&H6 XXX 20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKM<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KM<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/KM<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7C(X7  ?O%2A`Arial?  XXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7&  d dB)1dxd<:zTop of For7E(X7  ?O%2A`Arial?  XXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7B)2dxd0KS.SampleKM<6X9`(Courier NewKSN\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKM<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSN\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  (O$<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial RD$      1    _Forthesakeofsimplicity,weuseroundnumbersinthisOpinionwheneverpossible.(#$  0  (|G2D$ !.8dd8         0    HP LaserJet 40500(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular d(|3s$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3s$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK  !.8dd8     _  8DIXXdd8  SOY @  $INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE# $#Ԉ &   August23,2002Session L XDIX #XXDI#NIKKILYNN_HERRINGTON_ԀBOWIEv.RICHARDROYBOWIEXDIX   " @@ AppealfromtheChanceryCourtforKnoxCounty  " @@No.1326051JohnF.Weaver,Chancellor    FILEDOCTOBER29,_2002_   @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200102923_COA_ԄR3CV }  AV) ` dE<T` A U    RichardRoyBowie( Husband)andNikkiLynn_Herrington_ԀBowie( Wife)weredivorcedin2000. (x Wifewasawardedsolecustodyofthecouplesyoungchild.Husbandwasgrantedvisitation d pursuanttoacustodyagreementfiledMarch1,2000.TheTrialCourtfoundthatWifesmonthly P needwas$7,200,butthatHusbandwasunabletopaythisamount.TheTrialCourtawardedWife < monthlychildsupportintheamountof$1,057,andalimonyinfuturoof$1,500permonth.Husband ( appealsthetypeofalimonyawardedtotheWife,theTrialCourtsfindingregardingtheamountof  Wifesmonthlyneed,andtheamountofalimonyawarded#XXDI#XDIX.Wiferaisesanadditionalissueregarding  whethertheTrialCourterredinnotawardingherattorneysfees.Weaffirm.#XXDIL#XDIX   Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmed; ` CaseRemanded  L    #XDI% #XDIX.D.Michael_Swiney_,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichHerschelP.Franks,J.,and #`" CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.,joined. #L# JamesF.Logan,Jr.,Cleveland,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,RichardRoyBowie. %$!% CharlesH.Child,Knoxville,Tennessee,fortheAppellee,NikkiLynn_Herrington_ԀBowie. '"'   4-(- _ OPINION#XXDI, #XDIX  #XXDI #XDIXBackground#XXDI #       ` XDIX Thisappealinvolvesadisputeregardingthetypeandamountofalimonyawardedto  Wifepursuanttoafinaldivorcedecreeenteredin2000.In1996,after24yearsofmarriage,the t  partiesseparatedandWife,whowasnotgainfullyemployedoutsidethehome,filedacomplaintfor `  separatemaintenanceandchildsupport.Anordergrantingjudgmentbydefaultwasenteredin L  Augustof1997,andanorderofseparationwasenteredinSeptemberof1997,requiringHusband 8  topay$10,000permonthtoWifeaschildsupportandspousalsupport.Husbandneverpaidthis $ t  amount. `     ` Husbandfiledacomplaintfordivorcein1999allegingirreconcilabledifferences. 8  Wifecountersuedfordivorcealleging,interalia,adultery.Attrial,Husbandadmittedtohaving $  severalaffairsduringthecourseofthemarriage.TheTrialCourtgrantedWifeadivorceonthe   groundofadultery.      ` Thepartieshavethreechildren,onlyoneofwhichwasaminoratthetimeoftrial.  Wifewasgrantedsolecustodyoftheminorchild.Husbandwasgrantedvisitationpursuanttoa p custodyagreementfiledMarch1,2000,andorderedtopaychildsupportintheamountof$1,057 \ permonth. H    ` Duringthemarriage,thepartieslivedinvariousplacesincludingNewYork,Boston,  p Africa,Germany,andTennessee.Theyestablishedahighstandardoflivingthatincludedregular  \ travelandtheacquisitionovertheyearsofsuchitemsasaPorsche911,aPorsche944,two H timesharesinFlorida,aSteinwaygrandpianovaluedattrialat$20,000,andatleastoneairplane. 4 ThemajorityofthemovesmadebythepartiesappeartohavebeentofurtherorfacilitateHusbands   careerasadoctor.      ` TherecordonappealshowsthatHusband,whowas54yearsoldwhenthetrial  started,NXDIXXXDIisageneralsurgeonwithhisownmedicalpractice.Husbandalsoreceivesincomefromtwo   ministoragewarehousefacilitiesthatheowns.EvidenceattrialshowedthatHusbandsnetincome l! fromhismedicalpracticehadfalleninrecentyearsfromover$190,000P Q#  1      ׀in1996,toapproximately X"  $29,000in1999.Husbandattributeshisdeclineinincometoseveralfactorsincludingthesaleand D#! restructuringofahospitalwithwhichHusbandwasaffiliatedanduponwhichHusbanddepended 0$" for#XDIXXNXDI#NXDIXXXDIԀpatients;thelackofreturnonMedicareandTennCarepatientsduetoreducedfeeallowancesand %l # increasedprocessingexpenses;andthefactthatXantus,acontractproviderwithwhichHusbandhad &X!$ acontract,isnowdefunct.Despitethegreatdisparity,andrecentsubstantialdecline,inHusbands &D"% incomeoverthelastfiveorsixyears,theTrialCourtdidnotfindHusbandwillfullyunderemployed. '0#& TheTrialCourtfoundHusbandsincometobe$7,200permonth. ($' Ѐ )%(    ` Duringthe24yearmarriage,Wife,whowas50yearsoldatthetimeoftrial,was  primarilyastayathomemother.ShegraduatedfromEmoryandHenryin1971withamajorin  musicandaminorinelementaryeducation.#XDIXXNXDIq#NXDIXXXDIԀWhileatEmoryandHenry,Wifereceivedseveral  honorsincludingbeingvotedMissEmoryandHenrybytheadministration,beingvotedMayQueen t byherfellowstudents,andbecomingfirstrunneruptoMissVirginia.Evidenceattrialshowedthat ` WifealsohadstudiedoperaatIndianaUniversityandthenattheJulliardSchoolofMusic,butdid L  notobtainadegreeateitherinstitution.Wifedidobtainafewvocaljobsapproximately25years 8  ago,buttheevidenceshowedthatsomeofthese jobswerenonpayingandthatWifedidnotearn $ t enoughfromhervocaljobstosupportherself.#XDIXXNXDI #NXDIXXXDITheTrialCourtfoundthatWifesworkhistory  ` consistedofapositionasareceptionist/switchboardoperatoratafloralexchangeinBoston  L  approximately20yearsago,workwithachurchchoir,andsomeverylimitedworkatHusbands  8  medicalofficeandminiwarehouses.#XDIXXNXDI1 #NXDIXXXDIԀ#XDIXXNXDI!# $     ` Whendividingthemaritalproperty,theTrialCourtnotedthattheamountawarded   toHusbandslightlyexceededthatawardedtoWifeandstatedthatthecourtwouldtakethisinto   accountwhenmakingtheadditionalprovisionsofthedivorce,suchasalimony.NXDIXXXDITheTrialCourt   #XDIXXNXDIf##foundWifesmonthlyneedtobe$7,200,butalsofoundHusbandscurrentincomewasonly$7,200 p permonth.TheTrialCourtgrantedWifealimonyinfuturointheamountof$1,500permonth. \   Discussion  4 $   ` Husbandraisesthefollowingissuesonappeal:(1)didtheTrialCourterrinawarding  \ Wifealimonyinfuturoinsteadofrehabilitativealimony;(2)didtheTrialCourterrinfindingWifes H levelofneedwas$7,200permonth;and(3)didtheTrialCourterrinrequiringHusbandtopay 4 $1,500permonthinalimony.WiferaisestheadditionalissueofwhetherornottheTrialCourterred   innotawardingherattorneysfees.      ` NXDIXXXDIOurreviewis<  denovo<'  ݀upontherecord,accompaniedbyapresumptionofcorrectness  ofthefindingsoffactofthetrialcourt,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Tenn.  RuleApp.P.13(d);Boganv.Bogan,60S.W.3d721,727(Tenn.2001).Atrialcourt'sconclusions l oflawaresubjecttoa<  denovo<B)  ݀reviewwithnopresumptionofcorrectness.<  S.Constructors,Inc.v. X  LoudonCountyBd.ofEduc.<)  ,58S.W.3d706,710(Tenn.2001).#XDIXXNXDIY'#Ԁ D!    ` NXDIXXXDIThisCourthasheld: #l! 8  Trialcourtshavebroaddiscretiontodeterminewhetherspousalsupportisneeded $# and,ifso,itsnature,amount,andduration.Appellatecourtsaregenerallydisinclined t% $ tosecondguessatrialcourt'sspousalsupportdecisionunlessitisnotsupportedby <&!% theevidenceoriscontrarytothepublicpoliciesreflectedintheapplicablestatutes.'T"&   Andertonv.Anderton,988S.W.2d675,682(Tenn.Ct.App.1998)#XDIXXNXDI*#NXDIXXXDIԀ(citationsomitted).Atrial (#( court'sdeterminationregardingspousalsupportgenerallywillnotbealteredbythisCourtunlessthe )$) trialcourtabuseditsdiscretion.<  SeeRobertsonv.Robertson<L.  ,76S.W.3d337,342(Tenn.2002).It l*%* istherollofthisCourttocorrecterrorsbelowandnottofinetuneatrialcourtsdecision. X+&+ Ї   ` Whendeterminingwhetheraspouseshouldreceivesupport,howmuchsupport,and  whattypeofalimonyiswarranted,trialcourtsaretoconsiderthefactorsoutlinedinTenn.Code  Ann.365101(d)(1),whichprovides:  Ѐ8  #XDIXXNXDI[-#Indeterminingwhetherthegrantingofanorderforpaymentofsupportand ` maintenancetoapartyisappropriate,andindeterminingthenature,amount,length L  ofterm,andmannerofpayment,thecourtshallconsiderallrelevantfactors, 8  including: $ t (A)Therelativeearningcapacity,obligations,needs,andfinancialresourcesofeach  ` party,includingincomefrompension,profitsharingorretirementplansandallother  L  sources;  8  (B)Therelativeeducationandtrainingofeachparty,theabilityandopportunityof $  eachpartytosecuresucheducationandtraining,andthenecessityofapartyto   securefurthereducationandtrainingtoimprovesuchparty'searningcapacitytoa   reasonablelevel;   (C)Thedurationofthemarriage;   (D)Theageandmentalconditionofeachparty;p   8  (E)Thephysicalconditionofeachparty,including,butnotlimitedto,physical \ disabilityorincapacityduetoachronicdebilitatingdisease; H (F)Theextenttowhichitwouldbeundesirableforapartytoseekemployment 4 outsidethehomebecausesuchpartywillbecustodianofaminorchildofthe  p marriage; \   0  (G)Theseparateassetsofeachparty,bothrealandpersonal,tangibleandintangible; H (H)Theprovisionsmadewithregardtothemaritalpropertyasdefinedin364121; 4 (I)Thestandardoflivingofthepartiesestablishedduringthemarriage;   (J)Theextenttowhicheachpartyhasmadesuchtangibleandintangiblecontributionstothe   marriageasmonetaryandhomemakercontributions,andtangibleandintangible  contributionsbyapartytotheeducation,trainingorincreasedearningpoweroftheother  party;  (K)Therelativefaultofthepartiesincaseswherethecourt,initsdiscretion,deemsit l appropriatetodoso;and X  (L)Suchotherfactors,includingthetaxconsequencestoeachparty,asarenecessaryto D! considertheequitiesbetweentheparties.0" (#(# Tenn.CodeAnn.365101(d)(1)(2001). $X" NXDIXXXDI   ` Whileallrelevantfactorsmustbeconsideredwhensettingtheamountofanalimony %0!$ award,needandtheabilitytopayarethecriticalfactors.Anderton,988S.W.2dat683.Discussing &!% theintentbehindalimony,ourSupremeCourthasheld:"thepurposeofspousalsupportistoaidthe '"& disadvantagedspousetobecomeandremainselfsufficientand,wheneconomicrehabilitationisnot (#' feasible,tomitigatetheharsheconomicrealitiesofdivorce."<  Burlewv.Burlew<s=hers  ,40S.W.3d465, l)$( 47071(Tenn.2001)(quoting<  Anderton< >hers  ,988S.W.2dat682). X*%)   D+&*    ` Although"thelegislaturehasdemonstratedapreferenceforanawardofrehabilitative   alimony[,]"Crabtreev.Crabtree,16S.W.3d356,358(Tenn.2000)#XDIXXNXDI:#NXDIXXXDI,therelevantalimonystatute,  Tenn.CodeAnn.365101(d)(1),doescontemplate,undertheappropriatecircumstances,along  termawardofalimony,oralimony<  infuturo<@hers  ,providing: [w]herethereissuchrelativeeconomic t disadvantageandrehabilitationisnotfeasibleinconsiderationofallrelevantfactors,...thenthe ` courtmaygrantanorderforpaymentofsupportandmaintenanceonalongtermbasis....<  <Bhers  Tenn. L  CodeAnn.365101(d)(1)(2001)#XDIXXNXDI?#NXDIXXXDI."[T]hepurposeof[alimony<  infuturo<Chers  ]istoprovidefinancial 8  supporttoaspousewhocannotberehabilitated."<  Burlew<Chers  ,40S.W.3dat471. $ t Ѐ  `    ` #XDIXXNXDIB#NXDIXXXDIHusband'sissuesonappealregardingtheTrialCourt'sawardofalimonytoWife  L  concernboththetypeandtheamountofalimony.Wefirstwillconsidertheissueregardingthetype    ofalimonytheTrialCourtawardedtoWife.      ` Recently,ourSupremeCourtissueditsopinionin<  Robertsonv.Robertson<*Fhers  ݀regarding l  theissueofalimony,includingthetypeofalimony.<  Robertsonv.Robertson<Fhers  ,76S.W.3d337(Tenn. 4  2002).Mr.RobertsonwasemployedbyTVAandhisaverageyearlyincomewasapproximately   $60,000.Id.at342.Ms.Robertsonhadayearlyincomeofapproximately$22,000.<  Id.<QHhers  ݀   Accordingly,theRobertsonshadadisparityinincome,althoughnotaspronouncedastheparties  inthismatter.     ` Despitethisdisparityinincomebetweenthehusbandandwifein<  Robertson<Ihers  ,our l SupremeCourtheldthatthetrialcourt'sawardofrehabilitativealimony,ratherthanalimonyin X futuro,toMs.Robertsonwasnotanabuseofdiscretion.<  Id.<Jhers  ݀TheSupremeCourtin<  Robertson<7Khers   D reversedthisCourtwhichfoundMs.Robertsonshouldbeawardedalimony<  infuturo<Khers  ݀sinceshe 0 "couldnotberehabilitatedtoareasonablestandardofliving,viewedinthecontextofherpre l divorcestandardofliving."<  Id.<Lhers  ݀at339.The<  Robertson<VMhers  ݀Courtstressedtheimportanceofconsidering X <  every<Mhers  ݀relevantfactorprovidedbythealimonystatuteandapplyingthestatute'sfactorsonacaseby D casebasis.Id.at341.TheCourtrecognizedthelegislature'spreferenceforrehabilitativealimony 0 anddiscussedthepurposeofrehabilitativealimonyasfollows:  Ѐ8  [R]ehabilitativealimonymayassistthedisadvantagedspouseinobtainingfurther  educationortraining....("Rehabilitativealimonyservestosupportaneconomically   dependentspouse'throughalimitedperiodofreeducationorretrainingfollowing |!  divorce,therebycreatingincentiveandopportunityforthatspousetobecomeself h"! supporting.'").Itmayalsoprovidetemporaryincometosupportthedisadvantaged T#" spouseduringthepostdivorceeconomicadjustment.@$#   Id.at34041(citationsomitted). &h!%    ` The<  Robertson<JRhers  ݀Court,infindingthatthetrialcourt'sawardofrehabilitativealimony '@#' toMs.Robertsonwasnotanabuseofdiscretion,reviewedMs.Robertson'sworkhistoryasafull (,$( timehomemakerandparttimesubstituteteacherandherrecentattainmentofa4yeardegreein )%) education.<  Id.<Shers  ݀at342.TheCourtfounditsignificantthatMs.Robertsonanticipatedbeginningher *&* teachingcareerwithasalaryofapproximately$22,000,statingthat"[i]nlightofMs.Robertson's +&+ collegeeducationandnewemployment,weagreethatMs.Robertson,thougheconomically  disadvantaged,iscapableofrehabilitation."<  Id.<Uhers  ݀at343.Inaddition,theCourtfoundthatthe   rehabilitativealimonycouldassistMs.Robertsoninobtaininghermaster'sdegreetoincreaseher  earningcapacityinthefuture.Id. t    ` Webelievethefactsof<  Robertson<PWcurr  ݀arereadilydistinguishablefromthefactsofthis L  case.Wife'scircumstancesshowthat,unliketheeconomicallydisadvantagedspousein<  Robertson,<