ÿWPC sT×ïduUÀìÙŠLîbÙ$ouNÀëܳæÝœ]‚1ÆT&-M՗Т!¨€bšo®ÇÅÃ*Šìþ$ïVk·ÀÈfËCî²èt«}Xˆ ôR:Êk¤Ñ?–þ¨œED#6¶\+…þ6œ¥@¢/3ûd2Ô(7—[VWñÉ.Sî繚ŠÃ“h¿$%*™ ο¼hµ9ôM•“^X‚êg 6î°Ý›…çái`¾ó¤£ßú}zXMDˆ¶£R{¹UŒ]EØäWªÅÆssúŒ8³v-»R|@%²È&ÙZJ*Vdz|#Œ'Ï9ëæ?ÿ/]"Šáj€TúÌ}v–0ö‘h¹’¯%b#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ UN™ Æç Æ­ ÆsÆ99NÿÿÿEb 0ë     Böö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Ôu‘/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularlk.01s02 ˜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(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2/©$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€šY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô®ìò»»Ô d(|3¿$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€šY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€šY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€šY»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼šY»»»ÔÑ8€ÞçXXdé»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ò ò ìàÔ‡îFšYÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼šY»îîF #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  ÓOctober€15,€2003€SessionÐ öF ÐÔ‡XÞçX»¼šYÔÌò òÔ#†¼šY»XXÞçó#ÔROSE€MARIE€HARPER€BRITTòòóó€v.€ELMER€LEE€BRITTòòóóÔ‡XÞçX»¼šYÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Madison€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€58837€€€€€€Joe€C.€Morris,€ChancellorÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„00430„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€17,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ X*XXXÞçÔThis€appeal€arises€from€a€divorce€action€in€which€the€trial€court€granted€wife€an€absolute€divorce€andÐ V¦  Ðopen„ended€rehabilitative€alimony,€ordered€the€parties€marital€property€sold€and€the€assets€divided,Ð ? Ðand€entered€a€parenting€plan€submitted€by€wife.€€We€affirm€in€part,€modify€in€part,€reverse€in€part,Ð (x Ðand€remand.Ð a Ðò òó óÔ#†XÞçXX X*Ä#ÔÔ#†¼šY»XXÞço#ÔÔ‡XÞçX»¼šYÔÌÓ¸Óò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€part;Ð ã3 ÐModified€in€part;€Reversed€in€part€and€Remandedó óÐ Í ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼šY»àXÞç¼#ÔÔ‡XÞçX.¼šYÔDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€Ô_ÔW.S.Ô_Ô,Ð  ð Ðóóandòò€Holly€M.€Kirby,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ‰Ù ÐÌK.€Don€Bishop,€Henderson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Elmer€Lee€Britt.Ð [« ÐÌMary€Jo€Ô_ÔMiddlebrooksÔ_Ô€and€Betty€S.€Scott,€Jackson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Rose€Marie€HarperÐ -} ÐBritt.Ð f ÐÓ¦ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼šY»XXÞçÕ#ÔÔ‡XÞçX»¼šYÔÐ è 8  ÐÌÔ#†¼šY»XXÞç< #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÞçX»¼šYÔÔ‡ X*XXXÞçÔò òó óà  àRose€Marie€Harper€Britt€(ð ðWifeðð)€and€Elmer€Lee€Britt€(ð ðHusbandðð)€were€married€in€MarchÐ »" " Ð1974.€€One€child€was€born€of€the€marriage€in€July€1986.€€In€August€2001,€Wife€filed€a€complaint€forÐ ¤#ô# Ðabsolute€divorce€based€on€irreconcilable€differences€and€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€HusbandÐ $Ý$ Ðanswered€and€counter„claimed€on€the€grounds€of€inappropriate€marital€conduct€in€March€2002.€Ð v%Æ % ÐÌà  àThe€matter€was€heard€on€July€30,€2002.€€On€August€29,€2002,€the€court€notified€the€partiesððÐ H'˜"' Ðattorneys,€by€letter,€of€its€ruling.€€The€court€awarded€Wife€a€divorce€on€the€grounds€of€inappropriateÐ 1(#( Ðmarital€conduct.€€The€court€found€the€parties€could€not€reach€a€satisfactory€agreement€regarding€theÐ )j$) Ðdivision€of€property,€and€ordered€it€to€be€sold€and€the€proceeds€divided.€It€also€ordered€Husband€toÐ *S%* Ðpay€Wife€rehabilitative€alimony€of€$800€per€month€until€further€orders€of€the€court,€and€referencedÐ ì*<&+ Ða€previously€approved€parenting€plan.€€€Ð Õ+%', Ðâ âÐ ¾,(-ý Ðà  àHusbandððs€attorney€filed€a€motion€to€withdraw€from€the€lawsuit€on€November€5,€2002.€Ð ° Ðâ âHowever,€the€court€did€not€grant€the€motion€until€February€18,€2003,€when€it€entered€an€agreed€orderÐ ™é Ðallowing€substitution€of€counsel€for€Husband.€€Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àIn€January€2003,€Wifeððs€attorney€submitted€an€order€of€absolute€divorce€and€mediatedÐ T¤ Ðparenting€plan€to€the€court.€€Wifeððs€attorney€informed€the€court€that€she€had€forwarded€theseÐ =  Ðdocuments€to€Husbandððs€attorney€on€November€7,€2002.€€She€further€informed€the€court€that€she€hadÐ & v Ðmade€several€requests€for€responses€from€Husbandððs€attorney,€but€had€received€none.€€Ð  _ ÐÌà  àThe€court€entered€the€order€for€absolute€divorce€and€permanent€parenting€plan€on€JanuaryÐ á 1  Ð24,€2003.€€The€final€order€reiterated€the€terms€of€the€courtððs€August€2002€ruling,€ordered€each€partyÐ Ê   Ðto€pay€their€own€attorneyððs€fees,€and€ordered€Husband€to€pay€the€costs€of€the€cause.€€Husband€filedÐ ³  Ða€timely€appeal€to€this€Court.Ð œì  Ðà  àò òó óÌò òÓ  ÓòòIssues€Presented€óóÐ n¾  ÐÌó óÓXÓà0  àHusband€raises€the€following€issues€for€review€by€this€Court:Ð@(#(# ÐÌà8  à(1)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€parenting€plan€entered€by€the€court€without€a€hearing€in€JanuaryÐ b Ð2003€supersedes€a€parenting€plan€that€was€approved€but€not€entered€in€JulyÐ ûK Ð2002.Ðä4` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(2)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€court€erred€by€awarding€rehabilitative€alimony€to€Wife€withoutÐ ¶ Ðsetting€a€termination€date.Пï` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(3)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€rehabilitative€alimony€award€is€excessive.ÐqÁ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(4)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€by€ruling€the€partiesðð€property€could€not€beÐ C“ Ðdivided€and€must€be€sold.Ð,|` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(5)à8` Ð Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€entering€the€Order€for€AbsoluteÐ þN ÐDivorce€without€the€approval€of€Husband€or€his€attorney.Ðç 7` x` x ÐÌà  àWife€requests€attorneyððs€fees€and€costs€incurred€on€appeal.€Ð ¹" ! ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòStandard€of€Review€óóó óÐ ‹$Û# ÐÌÓ:Óò òó óà  àTo€the€extent€these€issues€involve€questions€of€fact,€our€review€of€the€trial€court's€ruling€isÐ \&¬!% Ðòòde€novo€óówith€a€presumption€of€correctness.€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòSullivan€v.€Sullivanóó,€107€S.W.3dÐ E'•"& Ð507,€509€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002).€We€may€not€reverse€the€trial€court's€factual€findings€unless€they€areÐ .(~#' Ðcontrary€to€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòId.óó€at€510.€€With€respect€to€the€court's€legalÐ )g$( Ðconclusions,€however,€our€review€is€òòde€novo€óówith€no€presumption€of€correctness.€òò€Id.€óóÐ *P%) ÐÌÐ Ò+"'+ ÐÓ  Óò òòòParenting€Plan€óóó óÐ ° ÐÓÓÌà  àHusband€submits€the€trial€court€erred€by€entering€a€parenting€plan€which€differed€from€a€planÐ Ñ Ðpreviously€agreed€by€the€parties€and€approved€by€the€court€in€July€2002.€€Upon€review€of€the€twoÐ jº Ðplans,€we€find€the€only€substantive€difference€to€be€the€amount€of€child€support€to€be€paid€byÐ S£ ÐHusband.€€The€parenting€plan€entered€by€the€court€in€January€2003€set€child€support€at€$655€perÐ < Œ Ðmonth.€€The€plan€agreed€upon€in€July€2002€provided€for€child€support€of€$580€per€month.€€Ð % u ÐÌà  àHusband€does€not€argue€that€the€amount€of€child€support€set€in€the€January€2003€orderÐ ÷ G Ðdeviates€from€the€statutory€guidelines,€or€that€the€court€erred€in€calculating€his€income€inÐ à 0  Ðdetermining€child€support.€€Further,€the€amount€of€child€support€set€by€the€trial€court€has€not€beenÐ É   Ðraised€as€an€issue€on€appeal.€€Thus€any€error€in€entering€one€parenting€plan€over€the€other€isÐ ²  Ðharmless.€€We€affirm€the€parenting€plan€as€entered€in€January€2003.Ð ›ë  ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòAlimony€Award€óóó óÐ m½  ÐÓÖ ÓÌà  àHusband€contends€that€although€the€trial€court€properly€awarded€Wife€rehabilitative€alimony,Ð >Ž Ðit€erred€by€leaving€the€duration€of€the€award€open„ended.€€Wife,€on€the€other€hand,€submits€theÐ 'w Ðaward€was€within€the€trial€courtððs€discretion€and,€further,€that€the€court€properly€should€haveÐ ` Ðawarded€her€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€We€agree€with€wife€that€alimonyòò€in€futuro€óóis€appropriate€in€this€case,Ð ùI Ðand€accordingly€modify€the€trial€courtððs€award.Ð â2 ÐÌà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€of€this€issue€by€noting€that,€contrary€to€Wifeððs€assertion,€this€CourtððsÐ ´ Ðopinion€in€òòPerry€v.€Perryóó,€No.€W2001„01350„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2002€WL€1751407€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð í ÐMarch€21,€2002)(Farmer,€J.,€dissenting),€òòÔ_ÔrevððdÔ_Ôóó,€114€S.W.3d€465€(Tenn.€2003),€does€not€stand€for€theÐ †Ö Ðproposition€that€a€court€may€award€rehabilitative€alimony€without€setting€a€duration€for€the€award.€Ð o¿ ÐIn€òòPerryóó,€the€trial€court€awarded€Ms.€Perry€rehabilitative€alimony€for€a€period€of€two€years,€andÐ X¨ Ðordered€the€parties€to€return€to€court€before€the€end€of€that€time€for€a€review€of€the€award.€€òòPerryóó,òòÐ A‘ Ðóó114€S.W.3d€at€468.€€The€issue€on€appeal€in€òòPerryóó€was€whether€a€showing€of€a€substantial€andÐ *z Ðmaterial€change€of€circumstance€was€required€to€modify€the€award.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÐ c Ðreversed€this€Court,€holding€that,€although€the€trial€court€retains€jurisdiction€to€modify€an€award€ofÐ üL Ðrehabilitative€alimony€for€the€duration€of€the€award,€such€modification€requires€a€showing€ofÐ å 5 Ðsubstantial€and€material€change€of€circumstance.€òò€Id.óó€€Both€this€Court€and€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ Î!  ÐCourt,€however,€specifically€declined€to€opine€on€the€propriety€of€the€original€award€of€rehabilitativeÐ ·"! Ðalimony.€€òòId.óó€€€Thus€the€reasoning€of€òòPerryóó€is€inapplicable€to€this€case.€€Further,€in€light€of€ourÐ  #ð" Ðconclusion€that€alimony€òòin€futuro€óóis€appropriate€in€this€case,€we€decline€to€address€the€issue€ofÐ ‰$Ù# Ðwhether€a€trial€court€may€properly€award€rehabilitative€alimony€without€setting€a€specific€durationÐ r% $ Ðfor€the€award.€€Ð [&«!% ÐÌà  àDespite€the€preference€for€rehabilitative€alimony,€after€reviewing€the€record€before€us,€weÐ -(}#' Ðbelieve€an€award€of€alimony€òòin€futuro€óóis€appropriate€in€this€case.€€These€parties€were€married€inÐ )f$( Ð1974,€when€Wife€was€sixteen€years€of€age.€€They€were€married€for€twenty„eight€years€and€have€oneÐ ÿ)O%) Ðchild.€€During€the€course€of€the€marriage,€Wife€€was€primarily€a€homemaker,€although€she€worked€Ð è*8&* Ðintermittently€part„time€as€a€substitute€teacher€and€teacherððs€aide.€€Wife€has€a€high„school€education,Ð Ñ+!'+ Ðand€currently€works€at€Wal„Mart€earning€approximately€$7.28€per€hour.€€Wife€testified€that€herÐ ° Ðhours€at€Wal„Mart€are€limited€to€twenty„five€per€week€because€of€Wal„Martððs€cut„backs€on€payroll.€Ð ™é ÐHusband€testified€that€his€gross€income€from€his€employment€as€a€mechanic€at€Ô_ÔSonocoÔ_Ô€and€farmingÐ ‚Ò Ðis€in€excess€of€$50,000€per€year.€€We€accordingly€modify€the€award€of€alimony€to€Wife€to€an€awardÐ k» Ðof€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.€€We€remand€for€a€determination€of€the€amount€of€alimony€in€accordance€withÐ T¤ Ðthe€factors€enumerated€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1).€€In€light€of€the€foregoing,€it€isÐ =  Ðunnecessary€for€us€to€address€Husbandððs€assertion€that€the€amount€of€the€alimony€award€wasÐ & v Ðexcessive.Ð  _ ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòDivision€of€Property€óóÐ á 1  Ðó óÓÏ0ÓÌà  àBoth€Husband€and€Wife€submit€the€trial€court€erred€by€ordering€the€property€in€this€case€sold,Ð ²  Ðrather€than€dividing€the€property.€€As€we€perceive€it,€the€primary€dispute€here€concerns€who€shouldÐ ›ë  Ðreceive€a€new€home€on€Liberty€Road,€which€is€mortgaged€for€$91,500,€and€who€should€receive€anÐ „Ô  Ðolder,€but€debt„free,€home€on€Ô_ÔWilloughbyÔ_Ô€Road.€€Both€parties€submit€they€should€receive€the€LibertyÐ m½  ÐRoad€home.€€The€order€of€the€trial€court€reads:€Ð V¦  ÐÌà8  àThe€Court€has€not€been€able€to€reach€a€satisfactory€conclusion€from€the€proposalsÐ (x Ðpresented€in€the€above€cause.€€Therefore,€all€property,€both€real€and€personal,€will€beÐ a Ðsold€and€the€cash€derived€therefrom€will€be€divided€equally€between€the€parties.ÐúJÐ Ð  ÐÌ€ÌThe€trial€court€further€ordered€that€debts€of€$91,591.91€to€Farm€Credit€Services€and€$2,979.89€toÐ µ ÐÔ_ÔWFSÔ_Ô€Financial€would€be€paid€out€of€proceeds€from€the€sale.€€Ð žî ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€parties€that€this€is€unsatisfactory.€€Although€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„Ð pÀ Ð4„121€it€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€to€order€the€sale€of€property,€we€do€not€believe€thisÐ Y© Ðcase€calls€for€the€sale€of€all€property,€both€real€and€personal.€€Moreover,€the€court€has€made€noÐ B’ Ðfindings€regarding€what€property,€if€any,€is€separate€property.€€€Although€the€equities€of€this€caseÐ +{ Ðmight€require€the€sale€of€the€partiesðð€real€property,€we€do€not€believe€equity€demands€the€sale€of€allÐ d Ðproperty,€both€real€and€personal.€€Moreover,€we€believe€the€totality€of€the€pÔ_ÔropertyÔ_Ô€can€be€dividedÐ ýM Ðin€such€a€way€as€to€be€equitable€to€both€parties€upon€application€of€the€statutory€considerations.€€Ð æ 6 ÐWe€accordingly€reverse€the€order€requiring€the€sale€of€all€property.€€We€remand€for€a€determinationÐ Ï!  Ðof€what€property,€if€any,€is€separate€property,€and€for€an€equitable€division€of€property€pursuant€toÐ ¸"! ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð36„4„121.€Ð ¡#ñ" ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòConclusion€óóÐ s%à $ Ðó óÓD:ÓÌà  àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€awarding€Wife€an€absolute€divorce€and€the€parentingÐ D'”"& Ðplan€as€entered€in€January€2003.€€We€modify€the€award€of€rehabilitative€alimony€to€Wife€to€an€awardÐ -(}#' Ðof€alimonyòò€in€futuroóó,€and€remand€for€a€determination€of€the€amount€of€alimony.€€We€reverse€theÐ )f$( Ðorder€requiring€all€property€of€the€parties€sold,€and€remand€for€an€equitable€division€of€property.€€Ð ÿ)O%) ÐÌÐ Ñ+!'+ Ðà  àIn€light€of€our€holdings€on€the€foregoing,€the€propriety€of€the€entry€of€the€absolute€divorceÐ ° Ðwithout€Husbandððs€approval€is€Ô_ÔpretermittedÔ_Ô.€€We€decline€Wifeððs€request€for€attorneyððs€fees.€€CostsÐ ™é Ðof€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant,€Elmer€Lee€Britt,€and€his€surety,€for€which€execution€mayÐ ‚Ò Ðissue€if€necessary.Ô#†XÞçXX X*¿ #ÔÐ k» ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  _ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGE