WPC # VUNa % 0(UPw@- 4m   0l 0D 0JH 0T 0^ 0hD 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d%U>U6B) 0@&DCf D3o B AO AU*vv~ev 0K D+ AO,{ 0DA D/ BHP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($&@FZ 8CaslonOpnface BT Regular DDDDӀf|$3|x((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d("$    &&&&7Border 1ddLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5++++'dxd d'B(C << G)'BG&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK<  9p`(Arial  !#d#$  ..   YYY FILED.X August18,1998CecilCrowson,Jr..AppellateCourtClerk  l !#d#$   $       %%MotherandMr.DunneachtestifiedthatMotherhadsufferedablackeyeina dunebuggyaccident.TheydeniedthatMr.DunnhadevercausedMothertohaveablackeye.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ( $ Figure  1  'dxd'C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . $    P %7XXdd7\RA'\R,/(A1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALS@ ATKNOXVILLEWILLIAMROSSALLENBRITTON, )C/ANO.03A019804CV00143      )  PlaintiffAppellee, )      )      )      )v.      )APPEALASOFRIGHTFROMTHE      )GREENECOUNTYCIRCUITCOURT      )      )      )      )PENNYJEANBRITTON,   )      )HONORABLEKINDALLT.LAWSON,  DefendantAppellant.)JUDGEForAppellant     ForAppelleeDAVIDL.LEONARD    K.KIDWELLKINGLeonard&Kershaw    King&King̜Greeneville,Tennessee   Greeneville,Tennessee@  OPINION%%XAFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       Susano,J.  Inthispostdivorceproceeding,thetrialcourtmodifiedtheparties1994divorcejudgmentbyawardingWilliamRossAllenBritton( Father)custodyofCodyAllenBritton(DOB:June21,1991)andMariahCheyenneBritton(DOB:January27,1993).ThedivorcejudgmenthadplacedthechildrenscustodywithPennyJeanBritton( Mother)baseduponthepartiesmaritaldissolutionagreement.Motherappealedthemodificationorder,contendingthattherehadnotbeenachangeincircumstancessincethedivorcesuchastowarrantachangeofcustody.  Sincethisisanonjurycase,wemustdecideiftheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsdecisiontochangecustody.Rule13(d),T.R.A.P.Seealso Hassv.ϜKnighton ,676S.W.2d554,555(Tenn.1984).  Fatherspetitiontochangecustodyaddresseditselftothetrialcourtswideandsounddiscretion. Brumitv.Brumit ,948S.W.2d739,740(Tenn.App.1997). [W]ewillnottamperwiththatdiscretionunlessthefactsdemonstratethatthetrieroffacthasabusedhisorherdiscretion. Id .  Inordertojustifyachangeofcustody,thetrialcourtmustfindamaterialchangeincircumstancessuch thatthewelfareofthechildrequiresachangeofcustody. Griffinv.Stone ,834S.W.2d300,30102(Tenn.App.1992).Thebestinterestofthechildistheparamountconsideration. Brumit at740.  FatherspetitionisbasedprimarilyonMothersrelationshipwithherboyfriend,MichaelDunn.ThereisuncontradictedevidencethatthepolicewerecalledtoMothersresidenceontwoseparateoccasionstoinvestigateanallegeddomesticdisputeinvolvingMotherandMr.Dunn.ThelattertwoindividualstestifiedthatoneachoccasiontheywerearguingϜloudly,andnothingmore.Mr.Dunn,inalludingtothefirstϜincident,whichoccurreda yearorsobeforethechangeofcustodyhearing,saidthatthey gotalittleloud.HeblamedϜthelaterJune23,1997,incidentona discussionthatgotoutofhand.BothheandMotheracknowledgedthathegrabbedherinsomefashiononthissecondoccasion,butbothdeniedthatheϜstruckherthenoratanyothertime.  TheevidenceisclearthattheJune23,1997,incidentpromptedMothersson,Cody,whowashomeatthetime,toruntoaneighborshouseforhelp.Thatneighborcalled911,resultinginϜthevisitbythepolice.ThereisalsoproofthatontheMondayfollowingthelastincident,whenMotherwenttopickupherchildrenfollowingtheirweekendvisitationwithFather,Codywas terrifiedatthethoughtofgoinghomewithhismother.  FatherspresentwifetestifiedthatshehadobservedMotherwithblackeyesonthreeseparateoccasions 0   כonebeingwhenMothertriedtopickupthechildrenshortlyfollowingtheJune23,1997,incident.Shetestified,withrespecttooneoftheotherblackeyes,thatMotherhadindicatedthat meandMikegotintoafight.  Thecredibilityofthewitnesseswasverymuchatissueinthiscase.Thetrialcourthadtodecidewhichofthewitnesseswerecredible,andwhichwerenot.HeresolvedthesemattersinfavorofafindingthatMothersrelationshipwithMr.Dunnwasachangeincircumstancesthatwarrantedachangeofcustody.Theissueofcredibilityisprimarilyforthetrialcourt. TennesseeValleyKaolinCorp.v.Perry ,526S.W.2d488,490(Tenn.App.1974).ThefactsbelievedbythetrialcourtshowedapropensitytowardverbalandphysicalviolenceinMothersrelationshipwithMr.Dunn,andaresultingadverseeffectonCody,ifnothisyoungersister.  Inviewofthetrialcourtsexplicitandimplicitcredibilitydeterminations,wecannotsaythattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsjudgmentchangingcustody.Itresultsthatthejudgmentisaffirmedwithcostsonappealtaxedtotheappellant.Thiscaseisremandedforenforcementofthejudgmentandcollectionofcostsassessedbelow,allpursuanttoapplicablelaw.       __________________________       CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.̜CONCUR:̜________________________HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.̜________________________̜HerschelP.Franks,J.