ÿWPCv }ù1ÍÖêgz×Ëf÷òÓÌRîv´ÿzý¨YlÊ›+¥‘U¯´]¯>^r÷`{{/[Hüå¥ÊY?ß ]èÉ"Ç&¨-Š?ÜUÈŸ>ÏõýÿeòQŠèzÆ_^zU¡§ƒer- g‚ôátrz1™Û$W¥Ý¹1§,/ÁZ4@Ìö& ~­¹rõo®ÈBð.ó Ÿ”§X»°ñ’ MwŠK$™˜…%f¯H®”xùvée‚̬ ®æê2«qtgóLìÍÚ³|Þ_꼪¼Nßx?n” ¹ìXTãb BisÔ³’ã?”FÉ#‹>(ê³uj´@†âcR¤S/8ðˆòi îk–Šså^FF®ߊWEeq8¹F¢#àWܧ½±yr÷ 1$õòö¼z˜%D*6}Ÿ«®V+'PÔ'áÑóûôwxomïÝÍñÅ#ÄBƒ苟&ÅY Ú÷~€Ñ.ó è¡ÅXN³ëæQ¬Ê(Ej‡äl·X×3"Ù,ôÙ‹ øaæüâf›¡©‘ôÞn{m¤LÜS­OÏè¸äxµ%Å«aÝ**.&vJáÊnìSÇû§©ÝTs…É«¬9üïö“ˆˆq^:ÈÚ Ç!î Ãö1êêpb %\^ b 0ˆnUÉNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ U~@Ð UN Æ^ Æ$ Æê ư #Áv N7 0D9UN}EË>ÍÍ 0¤ }¯!,ÌMU@ Y …s!s!}ø#UNu%8Ã%àû)û)îÛ1Û1 0¤É4m5o u5Òä>ä>b¶A¼¾AszC9íD&FI.HwMn”NÎUXÐW(YÙ0\0\u ]º~e~8h8h8h8h8h8h8h¶j¶jKÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈlÈl 0ëqqqq Bþqþq 0¤r D3¿r D-òr 0Kss ASjsƽs 0¤ƒt 0D'u A«ku»6 -s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÂ…·,bk2ÔÏî3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀô\  `(Times NewRomanTT(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular 4Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€exact€dates€of€birth€are€not€clear€from€the€record,€although€Mother€testified€in€March€of€1998€that€theÐ ° Ðchildren€were€seventeen,€fourteen€and€nine€years€old.€(|3?h$©©Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý sÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFatherððs€testimony€at€the€March€1998€hearing€indicated€that€his€earnings€had€not,€in€fact,€decreased.€€Rather,Ð ° Ðhe€testified€that€he€earned€approximately€the€same€income,€but€that€he€worked€longer€hours€in€order€to€earn€it. Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔPrior€to€the€enactment€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(2)(B)€the€courts€applied€the€so„called€ð ðlive„inÐ ° Ðboyfriendðð€statute,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(3),Ô#†ôº òò ôº ~#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€to€a€remarried€alimony€obligee€who€received€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.×ÃR×× C ׀РtÄ ÐòòSee€Ô_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€737€(section€did€not€apply€because€obligee€received€a€fixed€amount€of€alimony).€That€sectionÐ 8ˆ Ðcreates€a€rebuttable€presumption€that€the€recipient€of€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€who€lives€with€a€third€person€is€either€receivingÐ üL Ðsupport€from€the€third€person€or€is€contributing€to€the€third€person's€support,€that€the€recipient€no€longer€needs€theÐ À Ðpreviously€awarded€amount€of€alimony,€and€that€the€court€should€suspend€all€or€part€of€the€alimony€obligation.€By€itsÐ „Ô Ðterms,€this€statute€applies€only€where€(1)€òòin€futuroóó€alimony€has€been€previously€awarded,€and€(2)€where€modification€byÐ H ˜ Ðthe€court€of€the€previous€award€is€available.€€Because€we€have€determined€that€the€alimony€award€in€this€case€was€notÐ  \ Ðð ðòòin€futuroóóðð€this€provision€does€not€apply.€€Father€has€not€relied€on€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ô#†ôº òò ôº }#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€ððÔ#†ôº òò ôº #ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€Ô#†ôº òò ôº T#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô36„5„101(a)(2)(BÔ#†ôº òò ôº —#Ô)€in€any€of€hisÐ Ð  Ðarguments. ÂÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€court€also€denied€Fatherððs€motion€for€a€stay€pending€appeal. öÝ ƒRuU$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ‡ôlòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôlòòôlÔAt€the€time€the€MDA€was€entered€into,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†ôlòòôl~#Ôðð€36„5„101€Ô‡ ôlòòôlÔòòóóread€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ô‡ Xö¨XòôlÔÐ ° ÐÌà8  àÔ#† ôlòXXö¨K#ÔIt€is€the€intent€of€the€general€assembly€that€a€spouse€who€is€economically€disadvantaged€relative€to€theÐ `° Ðother€spouse€be€rehabilitated€whenever€possible€by€the€€granting€of€an€order€for€payment€ofÐ $t Ðrehabilitative,€temporary€support€and€maintenance.€€Where€there€is€such€relative€economicÐ è8 Ðdisadvantage€and€rehabilitation€is€not€feasible€in€consideration€of€all€relevant€factors,€including€thoseÐ ¬ü Ðset€out€in€the€subsection,€then€the€court€may€grant€an€order€for€payment€of€support€and€maintenanceÐ p À Ðon€a€long„term€basis€or€until€the€death€or€remarriage€of€the€recipient€except€as€otherwise€provided€inÐ 4 „ Ðsubsection€(a)€(3)€[€the€statutory€rebuttable€presumption€regarding€òòóócohabitation].Ô#†ôlòòôl#Ô(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€note€that€even€the€label,€ð ðperiodic,ðð€did€not€bring€the€rehabilitative€alimony€award€within€the€control€ofÐ ° Ðthe€court. {Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€òòHussey,óó€the€former€wife€remarried€in€1993,€prior€to€the€statuteððs€passage.€€The€court€in€òòHusseyóó€reasoned€thatÐ ° Ðthe€former€wife€had€a€vested€right€in€alimony€payments€because€the€parties€had€intended€that€the€alimony€provided€forÐ tÄ Ðin€the€agreement€would,€in€effect,€be€a€division€of€marital€property.€€Accordingly,€the€court€found€the€alimony€agreementÐ 8ˆ Ðto€be€a€vested€contractual€right€which€could€not€be€impaired€by€later€statutes.€€ sÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€referenced€subdivision€(a)(3)€created€the€rebuttable€presumption€that€an€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€recipient€whoÐ ° Ðlived€with€another€person€no€longer€needed€the€amount€of€support€previously€awarded.€€òòSee€supraóó€note€5.€(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular .Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€its€May€28,€1998,€order,€the€trial€court€recounts€that€Fatherððs€support€obligation€was€reduced€when€hisÐ ° Ðdaughter€moved€in€with€him€ð ðto€the€equivalency€of€thirty„two€(32%)€percent€of€his€ððnet€income,ðð€being€One€ThousandÐ tÄ ÐSix€Hundred€Dollars€($1,600.00)€per€week.ðð€€€Thus,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€parties€used€a€net€income€figure€ofÐ 8ˆ Ð$5,000€per€week,€or€$260,000€per€year.€€The€court€also€specifically€found,€when€reinstating€the€child€support€at€$2,050Ð üL Ðper€week,€that€the€parties€agreed€this€amount€was€substantially€less€than€it€would€be€if€the€guidelines€were€strictly€appliedÐ À Ðto€the€current€income€and€visitation€practices€of€Father.€€The€amount€of€direct€cash€payment€for€support€does€not€includeÐ „Ô Ðthe€other€expenses€Father€pays,€such€as€the€medical,€educational€and€automobile€expenses€in€dispute. ÖÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔIt€is€not€entirely€clear€whether,€prior€to€1993's€change€making€rehabilitative€alimony€a€distinct€category€ofÐ ° Ðspousal€support,€the€courts€considered€rehabilitative€alimony€as€a€kind€of€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€or€as€simply€a€different€nameÐ tÄ Ðfor€alimony€òòin€Ô_ÔsolidoÔ_Ôóó.Ô#†ôº òò ôº ~#Ô€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó€stated€there€were€two€kinds€of€alimony:€(1)€€temporary,€rehabilitative€and€(2)€long€termÐ 8ˆ Ðwhere€rehabilitation€is€not€feasible.€€816€S.W.2d€at€736.€€However,€the€court€also€used€the€termsòò€in€solidoóó€andòò€in€futuro.Ð üL ÐIdóó.€at€737òò.€€Selfóó€announced€that€a€ð ðthird€class€of€spousal€supportðð€was€created€by€1993€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts,€ch.€243.€€861Ð À ÐS.W.2d€at€363,€confirming€there€were€only€two€types€prior€to€the€amendment.€€However,€the€Court€found€it€significantÐ „Ô Ðthat€the€trial€court€had€stated€that€the€award€was€ð ðòòin€Ô_ÔsolidoÔ_Ôóóðð€and€further€compared€òòin€solidoóó€and€òòin€futuroóó€alimony,€statingÐ H ˜ Ðthe€first€is€rehabilitative€support€designed€to€accomplish€a€stated€purpose.€€òòIdóó.€€In€òòTowner€v.€Towneróó,€the€Supreme€CourtÐ  \ Ðdetermined€that€in€spite€of€a€marital€dissolution€agreementððs€characterization€of€monthly€payments€as€ð ðspousalÐ Ð  Ðsupport/alimony,ðð€they€were,€in€fact,€part€of€the€distribution€of€marital€property.€€858€S.W.2d€at€891.€€The€court€statedÐ ” ä  Ðhowever,€that€if€the€payments€had€not€so€clearly€constituted€part€of€the€property€distribution,€the€issue€would€be€whetherÐ X ¨  Ðthe€ð ðobligation€constitutes€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€or€òòin€solidoóó.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€890. äÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€addition,€€the€parties€specifically€waived€any€interest€each€might€have€in€the€property€or€estate€of€the€other,Ð ° Ðð ðexcept€as€to€the€obligations€imposed€by€this€instrument€or€by€the€courtððs€decree,€this€being€intended€as€a€full,€final€andÐ tÄ Ðcomplete€settlement€of€the€property,€marital€and€other€rights€of€the€parties.ðð€€In€addition€to€the€non„modificationÐ 8ˆ Ðprovision€specific€to€alimony,€the€agreement€also€provides€that€no€modification€or€waiver€of€any€of€its€terms€shall€beÐ üL Ðvalid€unless€agreed€to€in€writing€by€both€parties.(|3?h$§§Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý  e Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€amount€of€support€is€the€product€of€applying€the€guidelinesðð€percentages,€based€on€the€number€ofÐ ° Ðchildren,€to€the€obligorððs€net€income,€as€defined€in€the€guidelines.€€ð ðAfter€this€calculation€is€made,€if€there€are€no€changesÐ tÄ Ðto€be€made€pursuant€to€paragraph€1240„2„4„.04€below,€then€this€is€the€amount€of€the€child€support€award.ðð€Ô‡ ôº òòôº ÔTenn.€Comp.Ð 8ˆ ÐR.€&€Regs.,€ch.€1240-2-4-.03(5).€The€ð ðCriteria€for€Deviation€From€Guidelinesðð€section€provides€that€the€percentageÐ üL Ðamounts€are€minimums€and,€therefore,€the€court€ð ðshall€increaseðð€the€award€for€specified€reasons.€€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&Ð À ÐRegs.,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(1).€Ô#†ôº òò ôº #ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€The€section€also€allows€deviation€in€other€cases,€ð ðwhen€the€court€finds€it€is€in€the€best€interestÐ „Ô Ðof€the€children,ðð€such€as€where€the€obligor€parent€exercises€more€than€standard€visitation.€€€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.,Ð H ˜ Ðch.€1240-2-4-.04(2).€€As€explained€above,€specific€authorization€is€given€for€downward€deviation€for€income€overÐ  \ Ð$10,000€per€month€and€€in€instances€of€extreme€economic€hardship€in€order€to€achieve€equity€between€the€parties.Ô#†ôº òò ôº ™#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€Ô#†ôº òò ôº Ø#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔTenn.Ð Ð  ÐComp.€R.€&€Regs.,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(3)€and€(4).€Finally,€ð ðIn€deviating€from€the€guidelines,€primary€consideration€mustÐ ” ä  Ðbe€given€to€the€best€interest€of€the€child(ren)€for€whose€support€the€guidelines€are€being€utilized.Ô#†ôº òò ôº #Ôðð€€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&Ð X ¨  ÐRegs.,€ch.€1240„2„4„.04(5).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(e)(1)€allows€deviation€from€the€guidelines€ð ðin€order€to€provideÐ  l  Ðfor€the€best€interest€of€the€child(ren)€or€the€equity€between€the€parties.ððòò€óó€òòSee€also€Barnett€v.€Barnettóó,€27€S.W.3d€904,€909Ð à 0  Ð(Tenn.€2000)€(other€factors,€such€as€the€custodial€parentððs€income,€may€be€considered€in€making€a€downward€deviationÐ ¤ô  Ðin€some€situations). ÈÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€the€June€4,€1996,€consent€order€the€court€made€a€finding€that€the€proposed€modifications€were€consistentÐ ° Ðwith€Tennessee€law€and€in€the€best€interest€of€the€parties€and€their€children.€€The€court€was€aware€that€the€amount€agreedÐ tÄ Ðto€was€the€amount€that€would€be€due€from€strict€application€of€the€percentages€to€a€total€net€income€of€$260,000€per€year,Ð 8ˆ Ðòòsee€supraóó€note€14,€aware€that€Fatherððs€total€net€income€exceeded€that€amount,€and€was€aware€of€the€other€amounts€FatherÐ üL Ðhad€undertaken€to€pay.- ù- ²Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMotherððs€counsel€maintains€that€Mother€was€not€asked€to€bring€such€documentary€evidence.€€We€note€thatÐ ° ÐFatherððs€testimony€on€his€own€expenses€did€not€include€receipts€or€other€documentation,€and€that€he€was€unfamiliar€withÐ tÄ Ðthe€details€of€the€expense€statement.€ iÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔMother€did€not€include€any€income€or€expenditures€for€Mr.€Bryan€on€her€statement,€but€testified€that€hisÐ ° Ðincome€and€expenditures€were€about€equal.€€Ô#†ôº òò ôº #Ô /Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMotherððs€expenses€did€not€include€a€house€payment,€because€she€had€paid€the€balance€of€her€mortgage.€€Ð ° ÐFatherððs€mortgage€payment€was€$2,500€per€month. þÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€court€gave€Father€thirty€days€from€the€date€of€the€order€to€make€the€payment,€and€stated,€ð ððð[Ô_ÔI]fÔ_Ô€at€the€endÐ ° Ðof€thirty€(30)€days€from€the€date€of€the€filing€of€this€Order,€[Father]€has€not€paid€said€judgment,€[Mother]€will€be€entitledÐ tÄ Ðto€statutory€interest€on€the€unpaid€balance€until€paid€in€full.ðð ?Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔClara€had€moved€to€her€Fatherððs€residence,€and€Father€and€Mother€had€agreed€to€a€reduction€in€support€fromÐ ° Ðhim€and€an€amount€of€support€from€her,€with€a€net€decrease€in€his€weekly€obligation€of€€$700.€€When€Clara€moved€backÐ tÄ Ðto€Motherððs€house€shortly€thereafter,€on€February€23,€1997,€Father€did€not€pay€the€amount€due€before€the€modification.€Ð 8ˆ ÐÔ#†ôº òò ôº #ÔÔ‡ôº òòôº ÔMother€filed€her€petition€to€reinstate€the€former€amount€of€child€support€on€March€7,€1997,€but€the€trial€courtððs€initialÐ üL Ðorder€indicated€the€court€was€unaware€of€that€fact.€€The€July€order€corrected€that€oversight€and,€pursuant€to€agreement,Ô#†ôº òòôº [#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔÐ À Ðstated€that€the€increase€in€child€support€ð ðshall€be€effective€as€of,€and€be€paid€retroactively€to,€February€23,€1997,€the€dateÐ „Ô  ÐClara€Leach€moved€to€[Motherððs]€residence.ðð€€Father€has€not€appealed€the€amount€of€arrearages.Ô#†ôº òò ôº ¦#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€€Ô#†ôº òò ôº û#Ô Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔThe€court€entered€an€additional€judgment€for€$2,500€for€Motherððs€attorney€fees.Ô#†ôº òò ôº #Ô dÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€address€some€of€those€concerns€in€the€opinion.€€Others€can€be€disposed€of€more€briefly.€Ô‡ ôº òòôº ÔFor€example,Ð ° ÐFather€Ô#†ôº òò ôº Ú#Ôcontends€that€the€courtððs€earlier€ruling,€which€found€him€in€contempt€but€declined€to€impose€a€penalty,€is€òòresÐ tÄ Ðjudicataóó€on€those€issues.€€This€contention€ignores€the€facts€that€the€August€hearing€dealt€with€monies€due€after€the€MayÐ 8ˆ Ðhearing€and€therefore€were€not€previously€adjudicated,€that€he€had€previously€been€found€ð ðin€contempt,ðð€and€€that€he€stillÐ üL Ðhad€not€paid€the€monies€he€had€been€ordered€to€pay.€€Another€concern€is€that€he€cannot€be€held€in€contempt€for€failureÐ À Ðto€pay€the€alimony€which€ð ðclearly€terminatedðð€on€Motherððs€remarriage.€€Although€past€due€alimony€does€not€appear€toÐ „Ô Ðhave€been€an€issue€before€the€court€in€August,€as€we€have€discussed€above,€the€alimony€did€not€terminate.€Ô‡ ôº òòôº Ôò òó ó€€In€any€event,Ð H ˜ ÐÔ#†ôº òò ôº x#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔFather€has€provided€no€showing€that€he€raised€any€of€these€concerns€in€the€trial€court,€thus,€we€consider€them€waived.€Ð  \ ÐòòNorton€v.€Ô_ÔMcCaskillÔ_Ôóó,€12€S.W.3d€789,€795€(Tenn.€2000).Ô#†ôº òò ôº ä#ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔÐ Ð  ÐÔ#†ôº òò ôº #Ô ÄÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€also€note€thatÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô€Motherððs€petitions€for€contempt€requested€relief€that€was€civil€in€nature,€and€did€not€complyÐ ° Ðwith€the€notice€requirements€for€criminal€contempt.€The€procedural€safeguards€required€for€a€finding€of€criminalÐ tÄ Ðcontempt€were€not€requested€by€Father€and€were€not€observed.€€Thus,€there€is€no€indication€that€the€parties€or€the€courtÐ 8ˆ Ðconsidered€these€proceedings€to€involve€potential€punishment€for€criminal€contempt.Ð üL ÐÔ#†ôº òò ôº #Ô€€ NÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThat€statute€provides,€ð ðCourts€of€chancery€may€enforce€rules,€orders,€or€decrees€by€process€against€the€personÐ ° Ðin€default€or€by€process€against€the€person€in€defaultððs€property.ðð þÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMother€states€in€her€brief€that€the€trial€courtððs€order€directed€that€payments€of€the€fine€be€made€to€her.€€WeÐ ° Ðhave€studied€the€order€and€have€found€no€such€directive.€€The€order€is€silent€as€to€the€recipient€of€the€funds,€and€we€findÐ tÄ Ðno€Tennessee€authority€which€would€direct€such€ð ðfinesðð€to€the€mother€in€the€absence€of€an€order.€As€noted€above,€inÐ 8ˆ Ðfederal€courts,€coercive€civil€contempt€sanctions,€such€as€the€one€before€us,€are€typically€paid€to€the€court.€€òòSee€In€reÐ üL ÐChase€&€Ô_ÔSanbornÔ_Ôóó,€872€F.2d€at€401.òòóó ÏÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€MDA€designated€these€items€and€expenses€as€ð ðadditional€child€support.ðð kÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº ÔWhile€federal€courts€sometimes€distinguish€between€compensatory€and€coercive€civil€contempt,€òòsee,€e.g.,Ð ° ÐGlover€v.€Johnsonóó,€199€F.3d€310,€313€(6th€Cir.€1999),€we€are€unaware€of€the€adoption€of€the€concept€of€compensatoryÐ tÄ Ðcivil€contempt€in€Tennessee€courts.€€òòSee€Young€v.€Youngóó,€No.€01A01„9609„CV„00415,€1997€WL€107159,€at€*3n.€2Ð 8ˆ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Mar.€12,€1997)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed)€(ð ðWe€know€of€no€Tennessee€cases€recognizingÐ üL Ðcompensatory€civil€contempt€.€.€.ðð)Ô#†ôº òò ôº #ÔÔ‡ ôº òòôº Ô.€€In€the€federal€courts:Ð À ÐÌà8  àCivil€contempt€sanctions€may€be€imposed€for€either€or€both€of€two€distinct€purposes,€to€coerceÐ H ˜ Ðcompliance€with€a€court€order,€and€to€compensate€the€complainant€for€actual€losses€sustained€by€himÐ  \ Ðas€the€result€of€the€defendantððs€contumacy.€€If€the€fine€is€compensatory,€it€is€payable€to€the€complainantÐ Ð  Ðand€must€be€based€on€proof€of€the€complainantððs€actual€loss.€€If€the€fine€is€coercive€it€is€paid€into€theÐ ” ä  Ðcourt€registry,€not€to€the€complainant.ÐX ¨ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIn€re€Chase€&€Ô_ÔSanbornÔ_Ôóó,€872€F.2d€397,€400„01€(11th€Cir.€1989).Ð à 0  ÐÌà  àTennessee€appears€to€have€incorporated€the€concept€of€damages€arising€from€contempt€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ h¸  Ð29„9„105,€which€makes€damages€available€where€the€contempt€consists€of€the€performance€of€a€forbidden€act.€Ô#†ôº òò ôº #Ô€BecauseÐ ,|  ÐFatherððs€contempt€herein€consisted€of€failure€to€pay€support€as€ordered,€Mother€will€be€compensated€for€his€delay€by€theÐ ð@  Ðinterest€accumulated€on€the€arrearage.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ô‡ ôº òòôº Ô36„5„101(a)(5).Ô#†ôº òò ôº #Ô °Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFather€has€argued€that€the€alimony€payments€terminate€upon€the€death€of€Mother€and,€therefore,€the€alimonyÐ ° Ðis€in€futuro.€€The€MDA€is€silent€about€its€termination€on€the€death€of€Mother.€€Nonetheless,€the€argument€propoundedÐ tÄ Ðby€Father€has€been€specifically€disapproved.€€òòÔ_ÔGrissomÔ_Ôóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€476€(citing€òòSelfóó,€861€S.W.2d€at€363€(contingencyÐ 8ˆ Ðthat€alimony€would€terminate€upon€wifeððs€death€would€not€defeat€the€purpose€of€providing€support€for€a€set€time)). tÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôº òòôº Ô€€The€former€husband€alleged€that€the€òòin€solidoóó€alimony€provisions€were€void€as€against€public€policy€becauseÐ ° Ðthey€were€based€on€future€earnings.€€In€addition€to€holding€that€no€proof€existed€that€the€husbandððs€only€source€of€fundsÐ tÄ Ðto€make€the€payments€he€agreed€to€was€his€future€earnings,€the€court€found€that€the€agreement€did€not€otherwise€violateÐ 8ˆ Ðpublic€policy.Ô#†ôº òòôº #Ô Ý ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFatherððs€deposition€testimony€from€1996,€which€was€admitted€into€evidence,€indicates€that€he€was€given€aÐ ° Ðdraft€MDA€which€provided€that€he€would€pay€Mother€ð ðroughly€$4,400"€per€month€for€ten€years,€but€that€he€negotiatedÐ tÄ Ðto€pay€the€agreed€to€$5,569€per€month€for€twenty€years€in€order€to€ð ðkeep€the€retirement€account€instead€of€splitting€it.ðð AÝ ƒRz„$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAlthough€Father€testified€at€the€March€1998€hearing€regarding€his€desire€that€a€trust€be€established€for€futureÐ ° Ðsupport€payments,€he€also€raised€the€issue€of€placing€the€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€awarded€Mother€after€the€trial€in€trust.€€We€note€thatÐ tÄ Ðthis€court€has€addressed€child€support€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô,€stating:€ð ðÔ‡ôº òòôº ÔThe€award€for€back€support€is€intended€either€to€benefit€theÐ 8ˆ Ðparties'€child€or€to€reimburse€[the€mother]€for€contributing€more€than€her€fair€share€to€her€son's€support.€€In€the€absenceÐ üL Ðof€proof€to€the€contrary,€the€award€of€back€child€support€should€be€made€to€[the€mother]€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòState€ex€rel.€Ô_ÔVaughnÔ_Ô€v.Ð À ÐÔ_ÔKaatrudeÔ_Ôóó,€21€S.W.3d€244,€250€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).Ô#†ôº òòôº #Ô(|G2z„$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôº­ò»»Ô d(|3?h$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?h$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€E»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€…»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼…»»»ÔÑ8€EéXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îT…ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼…»îîT #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓApril€15,€1999€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XEéX»¼…ÔÌò òÔ#†¼…»XXEéó#ÔJULIA€SLEDGE€LEACH€BRYAN€v.€JAMES€WENDELL€LEACHÔ‡XEéX»¼…Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Maury€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€91„540€€€€€€Jim€Hamilton,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1998„00922„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€June€5,€2001Ð ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThis€case€involves€post„divorce€disputes€over€alimony€and€child€support€€and€issues€of€contempt€ofÐ xÈ  Ðcourt.€€The€father€commenced€this€appeal€after€the€trial€court€declined€to€modify€or€terminate€hisÐ d´ Ðalimony€obligation€and€awarded€the€mother€more€than€$50,000€in€child€support€arrearages€and,€€later,Ð P  Ðfound€the€father€in€contempt€of€court€and€ordered€him€to€pay€a€fine€of€$100€per€day€until€allÐ <Œ Ðjudgments€were€paid€to€the€mother.Ô#†XEéXX XEé#Ô€€On€appeal,€the€father€argues€that€his€alimony€obligation€shouldÐ (x Ðhave€terminated€or€decreased,€that€a€portion€of€his€child€support€payments€should€be€placed€in€trustÐ d Ðfor€the€benefit€of€the€children,€and€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€fining€him€for€contempt.€€We€affirmÐ P Ðthe€trial€courtððs€orders€but€modify€the€fine€imposed€upon€the€father.Ô#†¼…»XXEéh#ÔÔ‡XEéX»¼…ÔÐ ì< ÐÓƒÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ Ä ÐAffirmed€as€Modified€and€Remandedó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼…»àXEé#ÔÔ‡XEéX.¼…ÔPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.,€óóÐ ˆØ Ðand€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.óó,€J.,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌWm.€Kennerly€Burger,€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee,€Gregory€D.€Smith,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ L œ Ðappellant,€James€Wendell€Leach.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌJames€DuBois,€Columbia,€Tennessee,€John€A.€Day,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€JuliaÐ #`" ÐSledge€Leach€Bryan.Ð ü#L# ÐÓ` ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼…»XXEé #ÔÔ‡XEéX»¼…ÔÐ Ô%$!% ÐòòóóÔ#†¼…»XXEéó #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XEéX»¼…ÔÌà  àÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔJames€Wendell€Leach€("Father")€Ô#†XEéXX XEéˆ #Ôand€€Ô‡ XEéXXXEéÔJulia€Sledge€Leach€Bryan€("Mother")Ô#†XEéXX XEéî #Ô€married€in€1980,Ð ¬'ü"' Ðshortly€after€Father€began€his€medical€practice€in€Columbia.€€The€parties€divorced€in€1992€afterÐ ˜(è#( Ðâ âtwelve€years€of€marriage;€they€Ô‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€have€three€€children.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Ô#†XEéXX XEé#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€Father€is€an€obstetrician/gynecologist€whoÐ „)Ô$)ý Ðearns€in€excess€of€$400,000€annually.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéÃ#Ô€At€the€time€of€the€marriage,€Mother€held€a€nursing€degreeÐ ° Ðfrom€Vanderbilt€University.€€Since€then,€she€has€maintained€and€enhanced€her€skills.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àAt€the€time€of€their€divorce,€the€parties€entered€into€a€detailed€Marital€Dissolution€AgreementÐ tÄ Ð("MDA").€€Under€the€agreement,€Mother€was€given€custody€of€the€children,€and€Father€hadÐ `° Ðreasonable€visitation.€€Father€agreed€to€pay€$1,750€per€week€in€child€support€ð ðuntil€each€child€is€22Ð L œ Ðyears€of€age€provided€they€are€enrolled€annually€in€and€attending€college€full„time.ðð€€Father€alsoÐ 8 ˆ Ðagreed€to€pay€private€school€tuition€and€to€pay€ð ðcollege€expenses,€including€room,€boarding,€tuition,Ð $ t Ðbooks€and€supplies,€and€other€expenses€related€to€college€until€each€such€child€graduates€fromÐ  ` Ðcollege.ðð€€Further,€Father€agreed,€ð ðAs€each€child€reaches€the€age€of€16,€[to]€provide€an€automobileÐ ü L  Ðfor€such€child€and€[to]€be€responsible€for€all€expenses€related€to€the€use€and€maintenance€of€sameÐ è 8  Ð.€.€.€until€the€youngest€child€reaches€the€age€of€22.ðð€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àMother€received€the€marital€home€and€its€contents€and€Father€agreed€to€pay:€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àas€additional€child€support€until€the€youngest€child€reaches€the€age€of€22€all€expensesÐ „Ô  Ðrelated€to€maintaining,€repairing€and/or€replacing€all€improvements€located€thereinÐ pÀ Ðand€thereon€(including€appliances,€machines€and€equipment),€and€all€other€expensesÐ \¬ Ðrelated€to€the€residence,€yard,€swimming€pool€and€other€improvements.€€TheÐ H˜ Ðnecessity€for€said€expenses€shall€be€determined€by€[Mother]€in€her€sole€and€absoluteÐ 4„ Ðdiscretion.Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àMother€also€received€her€car€and€van€and,€€as€ð ðadditional€child€support,ððÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€Father€agreed€to€payÐ øH Ðfor€ð ðall€gas,€oil,€insurance,€maintenance,€repairs,€replacement€of€tires,€batteries€and€other€accessories,Ð ä4 Ðand/or€other€debts€thereon,€including€lease€paymentsðð€and€ð ð[a]t€the€expiration€of€the€lease€on€theÐ Ð  Ð1990€Lexus,€.€.€.€[to]€provide€[Mother]€with€a€similar€automobile€by€purchase€or€lease€and€[to]Ð ¼  Ðcontinue€to€do€so€every€three€(3)€years€until€the€youngest€child€reaches€the€age€of€22.ððÔ#†XEéXX XEéN#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€addition,€Father€agreed€to€pay€health€insurance€for€Mother€and€the€children€until€theÐ €Ð Ðyoungest€child€reached€the€age€of€22€and€to€pay€for€any€of€their€medical€expenses€not€covered€byÐ l¼ Ðinsurance.€€He€also€agreed€to€ð ðirrevocably€designate€[Mother]€as€the€sole€beneficiaryðð€of€his€lifeÐ X ¨ Ðinsurance€policy€and€to€ð ðremain€liable€for€the€payment€of€all€premiums€on€same,€if€any.ðð€€FatherÐ D!” Ðagreed€to€pay€for€a€term€life€insurance€policy€for€Mother€until€the€youngest€child€reached€the€age€ofÐ 0"€  Ð22.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéˆ#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ #l! ÐÌà  àMother€received€her€Individual€Retirement€Account€and€Keogh€Plan€and€$332,807.50€fromÐ ô$D # Ðan€investment€portfolio.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEéD#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔAdditionally,€Father€agreed€to€pay€Mother€ð ðrehabilitative€alimony€in€theÐ à%0!$ Ðamount€of€$5,569.00€per€month€.€.€.€for€a€period€of€twenty€(20)€years.ðð€€He€further€agreed,€ð ðSuchÐ Ì&"% Ðamount€shall€not€be€subject€to€modification€or€termination.ððÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà  àIn€exchange€for€all€the€provisions€listed€above,€Father€retained,€among€other€things,€hisÐ )à$( ÐIndividual€Retirement€Account€and€Keogh€Plan,€the€commercial€real€property€which€housed€hisÐ |*Ì%) Ðoffice,€and€his€medical€practice,€including€ð ðany€cash,€checking€accounts,€furniture,€fixtures,Ð h+¸&* Ðequipment,€machinery,€supplies,€Columbia€Diagnostic€Associates,€Physicians€Equipment€Partners,Ð ° ÐLtd,€and€accounts€receivable.ðð€€Each€of€those€items€was€retained€in€its€entirety,€free€from€any€claimsÐ œì Ðby€Mother.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€MDA€also€contained€the€following€provisions:€Ð `° ÐÌà8  àShould€there€be€any€obligation,€alimony,€child€support€or€other,€due€in€the€future,Ð 8 ˆ Ðafter€the€death€of€[Father],€the€children€and€[Mother]€shall€have€a€claim€against€theÐ $ t Ðestate€of€[Father]€for€monies€due€in€the€future€under€this€agreement.€Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÓ  Ó*€*€*€Ð ü L  ÐÓƒ"Óà8  àIn€the€event€of€a€breach€of€this€agreement€by€either€party,€the€party€breaching€saidÐ è 8  Ðagreement€agrees€to€pay€all€expenses€of€the€nonbreaching€party,€including€reasonableÐ Ô$  Ðattorneyððs€fees.€€ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€agreement€was€incorporated€into€the€divorce€decree€issued€on€January€27,€1992.€€TheÐ ˜è  Ðparties€later€agreed€to€modify€the€MDA,€and€in€June€1996€the€court€approved€a€consent€orderÐ „Ô  Ðreflecting,€among€other€things,€€the€partiesðð€agreement€that€Father€be€released€from€certainÐ pÀ Ðresponsibilities€required€under€the€initial€Marital€Dissolution€AgreementÔ#†XEéXX XEé,#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ,€including€the€purchase€orÐ \¬ Ðlease€of€a€new€vehicle€for€MotherÔ#†XEéXX XEé•%#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€every€three€years€€and€the€maintenance€of€the€home€and€vehicle.€Ð H˜ ÐThe€parties€also€agreed€to€divide€certain€medical€expenses€for€the€children,€and€Father€remainedÐ 4„ Ðliable€for€only€half€of€Motherððs€medical€expenses€not€covered€by€insurance.€€In€exchange€for€theseÐ  p Ðmodifications,€Father€agreed€to€pay€Mother€an€additional€$300€per€week€in€child€support,€makingÐ  \ Ðhis€obligation€$2,050€per€week.Ð øH ÐÌà  àIn€October€1996,€the€trial€court€issued€a€consent€order€to€change€custody€because€the€oldestÐ Ð  Ðchild€had€chosen€to€live€with€Father.€€The€order€vested€Father€with€primary€physical€custody€of€theÐ ¼  Ðcoupleððs€daughter.€€In€conjunction€with€that€change,€the€parties€agreed€that€Fatherððs€ð ðweekly€childÐ ¨ø Ðsupport€obligation€shall€be€reduced€.€.€.€from€$2,050€per€week€to€$1,355€per€week,€which€amountÐ ”ä Ðtakes€into€account€[Fatherððs]€obligation€to€support€the€partiesðð€other€two€minor€children€in€theÐ €Ð Ðamount€of€$1,600€per€week€and€[Motherððs]€obligation€to€support€[the€older€daughter]€in€the€amountÐ l¼ Ðof€$245€per€week.€€When€[the€older€daughter]€reaches€the€age€of€18,€and€has€graduated€from€highÐ X ¨ Ðschool,€[Fatherððs]€support€obligation€shall€be€readjusted€to€reflect€that€he€is€no€longer€entitled€to€anÐ D!” Ðoffset€for€[her]€support.ðð€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€daughter€returned€to€Motherððs€home€to€live€in€February€of€1997,€but€Father€continuedÐ $X" Ðto€pay€the€reduced€support€amount.€€On€March€7,€1997,€Mother€filed€a€petition€for€change€of€custodyÐ ô$D # Ðand€increase€in€child€support€Ô#†XEéXX XEé(&#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔafter€the€daughter€decided€to€resume€living€with€her.€€€Two€monthsÐ à%0!$ Ðâ âlater,€Father€filed€a€petition€for€termination€of€alimony€based€on€Mother's€remarriage€in€April€1997.€Ð Ì&"% ÐHe€also€argued€that€his€obligation€to€pay€alimony€should€cease€because€Mother's€financial€situation€Ð ° Ðhad€improved€due€to€his€payments€to€her,€while€his€earnings€had€decreasedÔ#†XEéXX XEéq-#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àFather€had€remarried€in€March€1993€to€a€woman€with€two€minor€children,€and€in€1996€Father€Ð tÄ Ðand€his€family€had€€moved€into€a€larger,€more€expensive€house.Ô#†XEéXX XEéQ/#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€Mother€remarried€in€April€1997,€toÐ `° Ða€Ô#†XEéXX XEéÀ0#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔcertified€flight€instructor,€who€earned€approximately€$14,000€annually.Ð L œ ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEé=1#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÌà  àAt€the€May€1998€hearingÔ#†XEéXX XEéÛ1#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ,€Father€testified€that€he€had€greater€expenses,€including€spendingÐ $ t Ðover€$22,000€per€month€on€his€new€household€and€the€larger€house.€€He€testified€that€he€ownedÐ  ` Ð$620,000€in€real€estate€and€his€personal€property€was€worth€approximately€$150,000.€€He€alsoÐ ü L  Ðtestified€that€he€had€to€work€more€hours€in€order€to€maintain€his€level€of€income€due€to€changes€inÐ è 8  Ðmedical€practice€in€the€area.€€Testimony€at€the€hearing€also€revealed€that€Mother's€estate€hadÐ Ô$  Ðincreased€dramatically€with€the€rise€of€the€€stock€market.€€Her€net€worth€was€over€one€million€dollarsÐ À  Ðand€she€had€paid€off€the€mortgage€on€the€family€home.€€Mother€testified€that€from€the€divorce€to€theÐ ¬ü  Ðtime€of€trial,€she€had€filed€four€contempt€petitions€based€on€Father's€failure€to€pay€his€obligationsÐ ˜è  Ðunder€their€agreement.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéA2#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àÔ#†XEéXX XEé.6#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔIn€its€order,€the€trial€court€found€that€Mother's€remarriage€did€not€affect€her€alimony€and€thatÐ \¬ ÐFather€had€failed€to€prove€any€material€change€of€circumstance€warranting€a€modification€orÐ H˜ Ðreduction€of€alimony.Ô#†XEéXX XEé’6#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€The€court€further€found€that€Father€had€failed€to€prove€a€material€change€inÐ 4„ Ðcircumstance€warranting€a€change€in€child€support€and€ordered€him€to€resume€weekly€payments€ofÐ  p Ð$2,050,€later€assessing€arrearages€of€$46,200€for€the€time€after€the€older€daughter€returned€toÐ  \ ÐMotherððs€custody.Ð øH ÐÌà  àThe€court€alsoÔ#†XEéXX XEéÎ7#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€found€Motherððs€contempt€petition€to€be€ð ðwell€taken€insofar€as€[Father]€hasÐ Ð  Ðfailed€to€pay€or€reimburse€[Mother]€for€medical€and€educational€expenses€previously€ordered€by€thisÐ ¼  ÐCourt.ðð€€However,€it€declined€to€find€Father€in€ð ðwillful€contemptðð€or€to€impose€a€penalty,€insteadÐ ¨ø Ðawarding€Mother€a€judgment€for€$5,581.92€for€the€accumulated€arrearages.€€Mother€later€filed€Ð ”ä Ðanother€petition€for€nonpayment€of€child€support€and€for€expenses€unpaid€since€the€courtððs€last€orderÐ €Ð Ðand€for€Fatherððs€failure€to€pay€the€amounts€previously€ordered.€€Father€requested€that€a€portion€ofÐ l¼ Ðthe€child€support€payments€be€placed€in€trust€for€the€childrenððs€future€needs.Ð X ¨ ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEéž9#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÌà  àIn€its€order€following€the€hearing€on€contempt,€the€trial€court€found€Father€in€willfulÐ 0"€  Ðcontempt€for€failure€to€pay€amounts€he€had€been€previously€ordered€to€pay.€€The€court€€deniedÐ #l! ÐFatherððs€motion€for€stay€of€judgment׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€ordered€him€to€pay€$100€per€day€for€every€day€he€failedÐ $X" Ðto€pay€the€judgment€in€full.€€The€trial€court€denied€Fatherððs€motion€that€a€portion€of€the€child€supportÐ ô$D # Ðâ âbe€placed€in€trust.€€Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àOn€appeal,€Father€challenges€(1)€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€terminate€or€modify€his€alimonyÐ ° Ðâ âobligations,€(2)€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€order€that€a€portion€of€his€child€support€payments€be€placedÐ œì Ðin€trust,€and€(3)€the€trial€courtððs€sanctions€for€contempt.Ð ˆØ ÐÌÓ  ÓI.€€AlimonyÐ `° ÐÓø@ÓÌà  àFather€advances€several€theories€for€the€termination€of€his€alimony€obligation.Ô#†XEéXX XEé=#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€The€first€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€Motherððs€remarriage€automatically€terminated€his€alimony€obligation.€€Ð $ t ÐÌÓ  ÓA.€Automatic€Termination€Upon€RemarriageÐ ü L  ÐÓXBÓÌà  àòòóóIn€making€this€argument,€Father€relies€upon€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†XEéXX XEé³A#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔðð€36„5„101(a)(2)(B),€whichÐ Ô$  Ðprovides,€in€pertinent€part:Ð À  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXXXEé#C#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà8  àIn€all€cases€where€a€person€is€receiving€alimony€òòin€futuroóó,€or€alimony€the€amount€ofÐ ˜è  Ðwhich€is€not€calculable€on€the€date€on€which€the€decree€was€entered,€and€that€personÐ „Ô  Ðremarries,€the€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€or€alimony€the€amount€of€which€is€not€calculable€onÐ pÀ Ðthe€date€the€decree€was€entered,€will€terminate€automatically€and€unconditionallyÐ \¬ Ðupon€the€remarriage€of€the€recipient.ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEéÉC#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔÌà  àÔ#†XEéXXXEéF#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThis€statutory€provision€was€enacted€in€1994€and€became€effective€April€24,€1994,€òòsee€óó1994Ð  p ÐTenn.€Pub.€Acts,€ch.€96,€more€than€two€years€after€the€parties€signed€their€marital€dissolutionÐ  \ Ðagreement.€€For€purposes€of€this€argument,€Father€characterizes€the€alimony€provided€for€in€theÐ øH ÐMDA€as€òòin€futuroóó€or€ð ðalimony€the€amount€of€which€is€not€calculable€on€the€date€on€which€the€decreeÐ ä4 Ðwas€entered.ððÐ Ð  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXX XEéWF#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔà  àFatherððs€reliance€on€the€automatic€termination€upon€remarriage€provision€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð ¨ø Ððð€36„5„101(a)(2)(B)€is€misplaced€because€(1)€the€statuteððs€enactment€postdates€the€partiesðð€agreementÐ ”ä Ðand€the€divorce€decree€and€(2)€the€statute,€by€its€terms,€applies€only€to€alimony€òòin€futuroóó,€and€theÐ €Ð Ðalimony€involved€herein€was€not€of€that€type.òòóóÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àBecause€Ô#†XEéXXXEéœH#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†XEéXX XEé¼J#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔðð€36„5„101(a)(2)(B)Ô#†XEéXXXEéK#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ,€the€statute€providing€for€automaticÐ D!” Ðtermination€of€òòin€futuroóó€alimony€upon€remarriage€by€the€recipient,Ô#†XEéXXXEéfK#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€was€enacted€in€1994,Ô#†XEéXX XEé*L#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ€we€will€notÐ 0"€  Ðapply€it€retroactively€to€an€agreement€made€and€a€divorce€granted€in€January€1992.€€òòSee€Waddey€v.Ð #l! ÐWaddeyóó,€6€S.W.3d€230,€232€n.€1€(Tenn.€1999)€(because€the€statutory€introduction€of€rehabilitativeÐ $X" Ðalimony€was€a€substantive€change,€that€provision€is€not€applicable€to€divorces€prior€to€that€1983€act).€Ð ô$D # ÐIn€€òòHays€v.€Haysóó,€709€S.W.2d€625€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986),€this€court€held€that€the€1984€statuteÐ à%0!$ Ðcreating€a€ð ðduty€of€rehabilitationðð€will€not€be€applied€to€divorce€decrees€entered€prior€to€its€passage,Ð Ì&"% Ðrelying€on€the€longstanding€legal€principle€that€statutes€changing€substantive€rights€will€not€be€givenÐ ¸'#& Ðretrospective€application.€€òòHaysóó,€709€S.W.2d€at€627;€€òòsee€alsoóó€òòMcCarty€v.€McCartyóó,€863€S.W.2d€716,Ð ¤(ô#' Ð719€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992)€(rehabilitative€alimony€statute€does€not€apply€retroactively€to€alimonyÐ )à$( Ðawards€made€prior€to€its€passage).Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àStatutes€are€to€be€applied€prospectively€ð ðunless€the€legislature€clearly€indicates€to€theÐ ° Ðcontrary.ðð€òòShell€v.€Stateóó,€893€S.W.2d€416,€419€(Tenn.€1995)€(citing€òòWoods€v.€TRW,€Inc.óó,€557€S.W.2dÐ œì Ð274,€275€(Tenn.€1977)).€€More€significantly,€Ô#†XEéXXXEéL#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔwhen€a€statute€creates€a€new€right,€eliminates€a€vestedÐ ˆØ Ðright,€or€impairs€a€contractual€obligation,€its€retrospective€application€is€constitutionally€forbidden.€òòÐ tÄ ÐóóTenn.€Const.€Art.1,€Sec.€20;€òòCollier€v.€Memphis€Light,€Gas€&€Water€Div.óó,€657€S.W.2d€771,€775Ð `° Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983).€€Courts€will€not€apply€a€statute€retroactively€where€to€do€so€would€disturbÐ L œ Ða€vested€right€or€contractual€obligation.òò€Kuykendall€v.€Wheeleróó,€890€S.W.2d€785,787€(Tenn.€1994).Ô#†XEéXX XEéER#Ôòòóó€Ð 8 ˆ ÐOur€Supreme€Court€has€construed€Article€I,€section€20€as€prohibiting€laws€"which€take€away€orÐ $ t Ðimpair€vested€rights€acquired€under€existing€laws€or€create€a€new€obligation,€impose€a€new€duty,€orÐ  ` Ðattach€a€new€disability€in€respect€of€transactions€or€considerations€already€passed."€òò€Ô‡XEéXXXEéÔDoe€v.€Ô_ÔSundquistÔ_Ôóó,Ð ü L  Ð2€S.W.3d€919,€923€(Tenn.€1999).Ô#†XEéXXXEé V#Ô€€Further,€a€ð ðvested€right,"€although€difficult€to€define€withÐ è 8  Ðprecision,€is€one€"which€it€is€proper€for€the€state€to€recognize€and€protect€and€of€which€[an]Ð Ô$  Ðindividual€could€not€be€deprived€arbitrarily€without€injustice."€€òòIdóó.Ð À  ÐÌà  àBoth€these€principles€have€been€applied€to€disallow€the€application€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô‡XEéXXXEéÔðð€36„Ð ˜è  Ð5„101(a)(2)(BÔ#†XEéXXXEéCX#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ)€to€decrees€entered€prior€to€the€statuteððs€passage.€€òòKline€v.€Klineóó,€No.€03A01„9706„Ð „Ô  ÐCV„00240,€1997€WL€677943,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.€3,€1997)€(perm.€app.€denied€May€26,€1998)Ð pÀ Ð(Tenn.€Code€Ann€ðð€Ô#†XEéXX XEé¯X#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ36„5„101(a)(2)(BÔ#†XEéXXXEéìY#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ)Ô#†XEéXX XEé>Z#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€could€not€be€applied€to€alimony€awarded€in€1991,€and€alimonyÐ \¬ Ðwas€not€automatically€terminated€by€wifeððs€remarriage€in€1996);€òòHussey€v.€Husseyóó,€No.€01A01„Ð H˜ Ð9504„PB„00181,€1996€WL€165512,€at€*5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€10,€1996)€(perm.€app.€denied€Aug.Ð 4„ Ð26,€1996)€(parties€intended€that€alimony€obligation€would€not€terminate€upon€remarriage€of€wife€andÐ  p Ðstatute€will€not€be€applied€retroactively€to€deprive€her€of€her€right€to€receive€payments).׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð  \ ÐÌà  àThe€statutory€provision€automatically€terminating€certain€types€of€alimony€upon€remarriageÐ ä4 Ðwas€not€in€existence€at€the€time€of€the€partiesðð€agreement€or€the€entry€of€decree€of€divorceÐ Ð  Ðincorporating€that€agreement.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéZ#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔWe€will€not€apply€Ô#†XEéXX XEéH^#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ€Ô#†XEéXXXEéœ^#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéß^#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔðð€36„5„101(a)(2)(B)Ô#†XEéXX XEé1_#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€retroactivelyÐ ¼  Ðto€create€an€automatic€termination€of€contractual€obligations€undertaken€and€rights€vested€prior€toÐ ¨ø Ðits€enactment.Ô#†XEéXX XEé‰_#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ”ä ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEét`#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÌò òó óÔ#†XEéXX XEéË`#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àAdditionally,€Fatherððs€argument€that€his€alimony€obligation€terminated€automatically€uponÐ l¼ ÐMotherððs€remarriage,€by€operation€of€the€statute,€must€fail€because€the€statute€applies€only€to€alimonyÐ X ¨ Ðòòin€futuroóó.€€As€explained€below,€we€conclude€that€the€alimony€established€by€the€parties€in€theirÐ D!” Ðmarital€dissolution€agreement€and€incorporated€into€the€divorce€decree€was€not€alimony€òòin€futuroóóÔ#†XEéXX XEéa#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ.€Ð 0"€  ÐòòIsbell€v.€Isbellóó,€816€S.W.2d€735,€739€(Tenn.€1991).€€But,€even€if€the€alimony€involved€herein€couldÐ #l! Ðbe€appropriately€classified€as€òòin€futuroóó,€it€was€not€subject€to€automatic€termination€upon€remarriageÐ $X" Ðâ âof€the€recipient.€€At€the€time€the€marital€dissolution€agreement€was€entered,€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€didÐ ô$D # Ðnot€automatically€terminate€at€remarriage.€€òòButcher€v.€Webbóó,€869€S.W.2d€336,€337€(Tenn.€1994).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XEéXX XEé3c#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéԀР° Ðâ âÔ#†XEéXX XEéÉe#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔÌÓ  ÓB.€Rehabilitative€Alimony€Statutorily€Subject€To€ModificationÐ ˆØ ÐÓKfÓÌÔ#†XEéXXXEé+f#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àAlternatively,€Father€argues€that€the€alimony€òòóóis€rehabilitative€alimony€and€subject€toÐ `° Ðmodification€by€the€trial€court€under€another€statute,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(2),€whichÐ L œ Ðprovides:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà8  àAn€award€of€rehabilitative,€temporary€support€and€maintenance€shall€remain€in€theÐ  ` Ðcourt's€control€for€the€duration€of€such€award,€and€may€be€increased,€decreased,Ð ü L  Ðterminated,€extended,€or€otherwise€modified,€upon€a€showing€of€substantial€andÐ è 8  Ðmaterial€change€in€circumstances.€€Rehabilitative€support€and€maintenance€shallÐ Ô$  Ðterminate€upon€the€death€of€the€recipient.€€Such€support€and€maintenance€shall€alsoÐ À  Ðterminate€upon€the€death€of€the€payor€unless€otherwise€specifically€stated.€€TheÐ ¬ü  Ðrecipient€of€the€support€and€maintenance€shall€have€the€burden€of€proving€that€allÐ ˜è  Ðreasonable€efforts€at€rehabilitation€have€been€made€and€have€been€unsuccessful.Ð„Ô Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(2).Ô#†XEéXX XEéÝf#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ \¬ ÐÌà  àÔ#†XEéXX XEé–k#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔFather€argues€that€he€demonstrated€a€material€change€of€circumstances€justifying€terminationÐ 4„ Ðof€the€alimony€obligation,€specifically€Motherððs€remarriage€and€her€successful€economicÐ  p Ðrehabilitation.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àThe€specific€statutory€provision€upon€which€Father€relies€was€also€enacted€after€the€partiesððÐ ä4 Ðagreement€and€divorce,€and€became€effective€in€1993.€1993€Tenn.€Publ.€Acts,€ch.€243.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéúk#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€For€theÐ Ð  Ðreasons€explained€in€the€preceding€section,€we€cannot€apply€this€later€legislative€enactment€to€Ð ¼  Ðalimony€agreed€to€and€awarded€earlier€if€such€application€would€deprive€Mother€of€a€vested€right.€Ð ¨ø ÐòòÔ_ÔWaddeyÔ_Ôóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€232€n.1€(if€statutory€amendment€constitutes€a€substantive€change€in€divorceÐ ”ä Ðlaw,€the€new€provision€is€not€applicable€to€divorces€granted€prior€to€its€passage).€€Whether€motherÐ €Ð Ðhad€a€right€to€unmodifiable€alimony,€not€subject€to€decrease€or€termination€due€to€change€inÐ l¼ Ðcircumstances€including€successful€rehabilitation,€depends€upon€the€intent€of€the€parties,€includingÐ X ¨ Ðthe€language€of€the€agreement,€and€the€law€at€the€time€of€the€agreement.Ð D!” ÐÐ 0"€  Ðà  àThe€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement€stated:òòóó€€Ð ° ÐÌò òó óÔ#†XEéXX XEén#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà8  àHusband€shall€pay€to€Wife€rehabilitative€alimony€in€the€amount€of€$5,569.00€perÐ ˆØ Ðmonth,€payable€semi„monthly€on€the€1st€and€15th€of€each€month,€for€a€period€ofÐ tÄ Ðtwenty€(20)€years.€€Such€amount€shall€not€be€subject€to€modification€or€termination.€Ð `° ÐWife€shall€pay€income€taxes€on€said€payments€and€Husband€shall€be€entitled€toÐ L œ Ðdeduct€said€payments€from€his€income.Ð8 ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€parties€used€the€term€ð ðrehabilitative€alimony;ðð€however,€that€term€must€be€interpretedÐ  ` Ðby€reference€to€its€meaning€in€1992€when€the€agreement€was€made.Ô#†XEéXX XEé7r#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ü L  ÐÌà@ššìàC.€€Rehabilitative€Alimony€ò òó óˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àSince€the€parties'€1992€divorce,€Tennessee€alimony€law,€which€is€primarily€governed€byÐ ¬ü  Ðstatute,€€has€undergone€revision.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101.€€Tennessee€law,€as€it€exists€today,Ð ˜è  Ðrecognizes€three€distinct€types€of€alimony€or€spousal€support.òò€€Idóó.;€òò€Self€v.€Selfóó,€861€S.W.2d€360,€361„Ð „Ô  Ð62€(Tenn.€1993).ò ò€ó óAlimony€may€beòòóó€òòin€solidoÔ#†XEéXX XEéu#Ô,€in€futuroóó,€or€rehabilitative.Ð pÀ ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ³wÓà  àTennessee€law€regarding€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€has€not€changed€since€the€entry€of€the€decreeÐ Lœ Ðherein.€€Alimony€òòin€solidoóó€€promotes€the€twin€goals€of€certainty€and€finality€though€an€award€of€aÐ 8ˆ Ðfixed€amount€without€conditions.€òòÔ_ÔWaddeyÔ_Ô,óó€6€S.W.2d€at€232;€òòSelfóó,€861€S.W.2d€at€362.€òò€óóThat€fixedÐ $t Ðamount€òòóómay€be€paid€in€a€single€lump€sum€payment,€or€it€may€be€paid€in€periodic€installments.€€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó,Ð ` Ð816€S.W.2d€at€738€("[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€mere€fact€that€the€lump€sum€amount€is€payable€in€installments€is€neitherÐ üL Ðconclusive€nor€determinative€regarding€its€status€as€òòin€solido€óóoròò€in€futuroóó").€€The€determinative€factorÐ è8 Ðin€deciding€whether€an€award€of€spousal€support€is€alimony€òòin€solidoóó,€is€the€intent€of€the€parties,€orÐ Ô$ Ðthe€court,€that€the€award€be€for€a€fixed€amount.€€òòSelfóó,€861€S.W.2d€at€363€(noting€that€the€trial€courtððsÐ À Ðaward€stated€the€alimony€was€òòin€solido€óóand€other€provisions€supported€intent€was€to€provideÐ ¬ü Ðpayments€for€a€definite€duration);€òòÔ_ÔGrissomÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔGrissomÔ_Ôóó,€15€S.W.3d€474,€477òòóó€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999)€Ð ˜è Ð(interpreting€the€marital€dissolution€agreement€to€establish€that€ð ðthe€parties€did€not€intend€for€theÐ „Ô Ðpayments€to€terminate€unless€the€wife€diedðð).€€Alimony€òòin€solidoóó€is€not€modifiable€even€upon€aÐ pÀ Ðshowing€of€changed€circumstances,€including€such€events€as€remarriage€or€the€increased€fortunesÐ \ ¬ Ðof€the€recipient€spouse.€òò€Selfóó,€861€S.W.2d€at€362;€òòTowner€v.€Towneróó,€858€S.W.2d€888,€890€(Tenn.Ð H!˜ Ð1993);òòGrissomóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€477.Ð 4"„  ÐÌà  àÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔAlimony€òòin€futuroóó,€sometimes€referred€to€as€ð ðpermanent€alimonyÔ#†XEéXX XEé©#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔðð€or€€ð ðperiodic€alimony,ððÐ  $\" Ðcontinues€support€that€was€incident€to€the€marital€relationship€and€continues€indefinitely.€€It€isÐ ø$H # Ðgenerally€based€on€the€need€of€the€recipient€for€continued€Ô_ÔlongtermÔ_Ô€support€after€the€breakup€of€theÐ ä%4!$ Ðmarriage.€€Today,€as€in€1992,€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€remains€subject€to€the€control€of€the€court,€and€mayÐ Ð& "% Ðbe€modified€upon€a€showing€of€a€significant€and€material€change€of€circumstances.€€òòSelfóó,€861€S.W.2dÐ ¼' #& Ðat€361.Ô#†XEéXX XEé2€#ÔÐ ¨(ø#' ÐÌà  àRehabilitative€alimony€is€designed€to€help€a€spouse€who€is€economically€disadvantaged,Ð €*Ð%) Ðrelative€to€the€other€spouse,€to€become€financially€self„sufficient.€€It€is€intended€to€eliminateÐ l+¼&* Ðdependency€of€one€ex„spouse€upon€the€other€and€to€relieve€the€parties€of€ð ðimpediments€incident€toÐ ° Ðthe€dissolved€marriage.ðð€òòIdóó.€€Rehabilitative€alimony€was€introduced€into€our€statutes€in€1984.Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€1992,€the€spousal€support€statute,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d),€provided,€in€pertinentÐ tÄ Ðpart:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àIt€is€the€intent€of€the€general€assembly€that€a€spouse€who€is€economicallyÐ 8 ˆ Ðdisadvantaged€relative€to€the€other€spouse€be€rehabilitated€whenever€possible€by€theÐ $ t Ðgranting€of€an€order€for€payment€of€rehabilitative,€temporary€support€andÐ  ` Ðmaintenance.€€Where€there€is€such€relative€economic€disadvantage€and€rehabilitationÐ ü L  Ðis€not€feasible€in€consideration€of€all€relevant€factors,€including€those€set€out€in€theÐ è 8  Ðsubsection,€then€the€court€may€grant€an€order€for€payment€of€support€andÐ Ô$  Ðmaintenance€on€a€long„term€basis€or€until€the€death€or€remarriage€of€the€recipientÐ À  Ðexcept€as€otherwise€provided€in€subdivision€(a)(3).׃"×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ьü Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOur€Supreme€Court€characterized€this€statute€as€distinguishing€two€types€of€support.€€ð ðOne€Ð „Ô  Ðis€temporary€and€designed€to€rehabilitate;€the€other€is€appropriate€for€long€term€support,€whenÐ pÀ Ðrehabilitation€is€not€feasible.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€736.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€the€parties€herein€entered€into€their€agreement,€the€nature€of€rehabilitativeÐ 4„ Ðalimony€had€been€recently€discussed€by€our€Supreme€Court:Ð  p ÐÌÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà8  à[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€advent€of€rehabilitative€support€did€not€totally€displace€permanent€alimony;€theÐ øH Ðcourts€may€still€award€long„term€support€and€maintenance€until€remarriage€or€deathÐ ä4 Ðof€the€recipient€in€situations€where€rehabilitation€is€simply€not€feasible.€€WhereÐ Ð  Ðrehabilitative€support€is€awarded,€it€may€be€made€subject€to€conditions€imposed€byÐ ¼  Ðthe€court€or€agreed€to€by€the€parties.€€But€where€the€rehabilitative€award€has€beenÐ ¨ø Ðmade€for€a€fixed€amount,€the€award€must€be€considered€non-modifiable,€even€if€it€isÐ ”ä Ðto€be€paid€in€installments€and€not€in€a€lump€sum.€€The€certainty€that€results€from€suchÐ €Ð Ða€rule€benefits€both€parties,€allowing€each€to€make€long-range€financial€plans€for€theirÐ l¼ Ðown€futures€and€for€the€future€of€any€children€affected€by€the€break-up€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðmarriage.€€Unnecessary€disruption€of€financial€plans€and€expectations€does€not€serveÐ D!” Ðthe€policy€fostered€by€the€legislature€in€its€efforts€to€provide€rehabilitation€forÐ 0"€  Ðeconomically€disadvantaged€family€members€faced€with€marital€dissolution.€€TheÐ #l! Ðrule€we€have€recognized€today€will€foster€that€legislative€policy€of€rehabilitation.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIsbellóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€739€(citations€omitted).Ð à%0!$ ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEéúŠ#ÔÌà  àThe€primary€issue€in€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó€was€whether€the€statute€creating€a€presumption€that€the€recipientÐ ¸'#& Ðof€alimony€€òòin€futuroóó€who€lived€with€a€third€party€no€longer€needed€the€amount€of€alimony€awardedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwas€applicable€to€rehabilitative€alimony.€€The€court€held€that€it€was€not€because€the€statute€ð ðby€itsÐ ° Ðown€terms,€applies€only€to€ððalimonyòò€in€futuroóóðððð€and€not€to€the€temporary,€rehabilitative€supportÐ œì Ðawarded€to€Ms.€Ô_ÔIsbellÔ_Ô.òò€Idóó.€at€737.€€Expressly€adopting€and€quoting€from€the€Court€of€Appeals€opinionÐ ˆØ Ðin€òòGerlach€v.€Ô_ÔGerlachÔ_Ôóó,€C.A.€No.€122,€1988€WL€102744€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€6,€1988)€(no€Tenn.€R.Ð tÄ ÐApp.€P.€11€application€filed),€the€Court€further€held:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àAn€award€of€alimony€may€be€òòin€solidoóó€(a€definite€amount)€or€òòin€futuroóó€(an€indefiniteÐ 8 ˆ Ðamount€over€an€indefinite€period€of€time).€€ð ðThe€determining€factor€in€distinguishingÐ $ t Ðwhether€alimony€is€òòin€futuro€óóor€òòin€solidoóó€is€the€definiteness€or€indefiniteness€of€theÐ  ` Ðamount€ordered€to€be€paid.ðð€.€.€.€€Although€the€court€did€not€specify€the€total€amountÐ ü L  Ðpaid,€the€full€amount€of€alimony€payable€„€$16,800€„€may€be€definitely€determinedÐ è 8  Ðby€simply€multiplying€the€monthly€sum€($400)€times€the€designated€duration€(42Ð Ô$  Ðmonths).€.€.€.€€The€mere€fact€that€the€lump€sum€amount€is€payable€in€installments€isÐ À  Ðneither€conclusive€nor€determinative€regarding€its€status€as€òòin€solidoóó€or€òòin€futuroóó.Ьü Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIsbellóó,€816€S.W.2d€at€738€€(citations€omitted).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€òòÔ_ÔGerlachÔ_Ôóó€court€had€found€Ms.€Gerlachððs€alimony€to€be€òòin€solidoóó€and€not€subject€toÐ \¬ Ðtermination€upon€remarriage.€€The€court€also€found€it€significant€that€the€decree€awarding€alimonyÐ H˜ Ðhad€no€language€providing€for€termination.€€òòId.óó€€The€òòIsbellóó€court€also€noted,€ð ðIf€trial€courts€wish€toÐ 4„ Ðretain€the€right€to€modify€an€award€of€rehabilitative€support,€they€should€either€place€certainÐ  p Ðconditions€on€the€award€or€not€make€it€for€a€sum€certain€over€a€fixed€period€of€time.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€739€n.1.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAs€òòIsbellóó€makes€clear,€at€the€time€of€the€partiesðð€agreement€and€decree€of€divorce,Ð ä4 Ðrehabilitative€alimony€established€for€a€definite€duration€and€a€definite€amount€and€not€specificallyÐ Ð  Ðsubject€to€conditions€was€òòóónot€subject€to€later€modification.€€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó€also€makes€clear€that€a€statuteÐ ¼  Ðapplicable€toòò€in€futuroóó€alimony€did€not€apply€to€rehabilitative€alimony.Ð ¨ø ÐÌÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àòòIsbellóó€was€followed€closely€by€òòCampbell€v.€Campbellóó,€832€S.W.2d€31€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991),Ð €Ð Ðin€which€this€court€reluctantly€affirmed€the€termination€of€ð ðrehabilitative€periodic€alimonyðð€to€aÐ l¼ Ðdisabled€and€unemployable€wife.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€òòCampbellóó,€the€wife€was€awarded€ð ð$1,250.00€per€month€.€.€.€forÐ X ¨ Ða€period€of€36€months,€the€remarriage€or€death€of€the€wife,€whichever€should€first€occur.ðð€€832Ð D!” ÐS.W.2d€at€31.€€When€wife€required€an€extension€of€her€support€because€she€was€unable€to€gainÐ 0"€  Ðemployment€or€improve€her€skills€due€to€deteriorating€health,€the€trial€court€noted€that,€while€theÐ #l! Ðlegislature€enacted€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(d)€providing€for€rehabilitative€alimony€in€1984,€itÐ $X" Ðmade€no€provision€for€subsequent€modification€of€such€an€award.€€That€court€felt€ð ðconstrained€toÐ ô$D # Ðfind€that€the€award€originally€made€became€the€final€judgment€as€to€alimony€and€is€not€now€subjectÐ à%0!$ Ðto€modification.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€32.€€òòIsbellóó€was€released€after€the€trial€courtððs€order€but€before€this€courtÐ Ì&"% Ðrendered€its€opinion.€€We€stated,€ð ð[T]he€Rule€announced€in€òòIsbellóó€precludes€a€trial€court€fromÐ ¸'#& Ðreopening€an€award€of€rehabilitative€alimony€unless€the€court€has€expressly€retained€the€right€toÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmodify€the€award.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€We€further€suggested€that€the€legislature€consider€amending€the€statuteð ðbyÐ ° Ðproviding€that€a€decree€of€rehabilitative€alimony€shall€remain€in€the€courtððs€control€for€the€durationÐ œì Ðof€the€award,€and€may€be€increased,€decreased,€or€otherwise€modified€upon€a€showing€of€aÐ ˆØ Ðsubstantial€and€material€change€in€circumstances.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€33.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àShortly€thereafter,€the€legislature€did€amend€the€statute€to€provide€for€the€courtððs€continuingÐ L œ Ðcontrol€over€awards€of€rehabilitative€alimony.€€òòóó1993€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts,€ch.€243.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEé#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThe€approach€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðrehabilitative€alimony€changed€with€these€amendments.€€As€it€is€presently€conceived,€rehabilitativeÐ $ t Ðalimony€is€statutory€in€origin€and€is€clearly€distinct€from€the€other€two€types.€€Its€modifiability€hasÐ  ` Ðbeen€clearly€established.€€In€òòSelf€v.€Selfóó€€the€Supreme€Court€discussed€those€1993€legislative€changesÐ ü L  Ðeven€though€they€were€not€applicable€to€the€dispute€in€òòSelfóó,€stating,€ð ðA€third€class€of€spousal€supportÐ è 8  Ðhas€been€created€.€.€.€.ðð€€861€S.W.2d€at€363.Ô#†XEéXX XEé ¦#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€The€Court€further€observed:Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔI]tÔ_Ô€appears€the€legislature€has€specifically€given€trial€courts€the€authority€to€orderÐ ¬ü  Ðawards€designed€to€accomplish€the€rehabilitation€of€a€spouse€found€to€beÐ ˜è  Ðeconomically€disadvantaged€but€which€remain€subject€to€modification€by€the€courtÐ „Ô  Ðupon€a€showing€of€ð ðsubstantial€and€material€change€in€circumstances.ðð€€This€optionÐ pÀ Ðobviously€sacrifices€the€certainty€incident€to€an€award€of€ð ðalimony€òòin€solidoóóðð€for€theÐ \¬ Ðcontinued€monitoring€of€the€partiesðð€circumstances€by€the€court€.€.€.€.ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.Ð  p ÐÌà  àIt€is€clear€from€these€authorities€that€prior€to€the€1993€change€rehabilitative€alimony€wasÐ øH Ðconsidered€different€from€and€alternative€to€alimony€òòin€futuroóó.׃%×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€According€to€theòò€Ô_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó€court,€theÐ ä4 Ðprimary€distinguishing€factor€was€whether€the€alimony€was€permanent€and€continuing€the€supportÐ Ð  Ðincident€to€marriage€indefinitely,€or€was€set€for€a€definite€duration.€€In€òòSelfóó,€the€court€explained€thatÐ ¼  Ðthe€distinction€based€on€the€definiteness€of€the€term€ð ðactually€reflects€the€essential€purpose€of€eachÐ ¨ø Ðaward.ðð€861€S.W.2d€at€362.€€Thus,€the€òòSelfóó€court€found€the€initial€purpose€of€the€award,€in€view€ofÐ ”ä Ðthe€circumstances€of€the€parties€at€the€time€of€the€award,€was€the€ð ðcritical€factorðð€in€determiningÐ €Ð Ðwhether€an€alimony€award€was€modifiable.€òòIdóó.€at€361.€€In€òòTowneróó,€the€Court€stated€that€susceptibilityÐ l¼ Ðto€modification€is€not€totally€dependent€on€the€duration€of€the€payments,€but€that€consideration€ofÐ X ¨ Ðall€relevant€factors€could€require€or€justify€definite,€nonmodifiable€payments€on€a€Ô_ÔlongtermÔ_Ô€basisÐ D!” Ðbecause€of€€the€need€for€certainty€and€finality.€€858€S.W.2d€at€890.€Ô#†XEéXX XEé°¨#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€Most€recently,€the€Supreme€CourtÐ ° Ðhas€returned€to€defining€the€distinction€between€alimony€òòin€futuroóó€and€alimony€òòin€solidoóó€asÐ œì Ðð ðdetermined€by€either€the€definiteness€or€indefiniteness€of€the€sum€of€alimony€ordered€to€paid€at€theÐ ˆØ Ðtime€of€the€award.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔWaddeyÔ_Ôóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€232.Ô_Ô׃<×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÐ tÄ ÐÔ#†XEéXX XE鬱#ÔÌà  àThe€question€of€whether€the€alimony€established€in€the€marital€dissolution€agreement€wasÐ L œ Ðnon„modifiable€ð ðcan€be€resolved€only€by€an€examination€of€the€language€of€the€provision€and€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcircumstances€under€which€the€agreement€was€executed€and€made€a€part€of€the€judgment.ðð€€òòTowneróó,Ð $ t Ð858€S.W.2d€at€890.€€The€parties€used€the€term€ð ðrehabilitativeðð€to€describe€the€alimony€created€in€theirÐ  ` Ðagreement.€€That€choice€is€indicative€of€the€partiesðð€intent,€and€the€term€ð ðrehabilitativeðð€as€used€inÐ ü L  Ð1992€must€be€interpreted€in€light€of€the€existing€statuteððs€use€of€the€same€term€and€courtÐ è 8  Ðinterpretations€of€that€statute.€€Under€those€authorities,€ð ðrehabilitative,€temporaryðð€support€wasÐ Ô$  Ðdistinct€from€support€awarded€ð ðon€a€long„term€basis€or€until€the€death€or€remarriage€of€the€recipient.ððÐ À  ÐÌÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àThe€use€of€the€term€"rehabilitative"€also€reflects€an€intent€by€the€parties€to€enable€Mother€to€Ð ˜è  Ðbecome€economically€self„sufficient€relative€to€Father€within€a€specific€€time€frame.€€òòSelfóó,€861Ð „Ô  ÐS.W.2d€at€363.Ô#†XEéXX XEéá·#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ€€Ô#†XEéXXXEé-¹#ÔFurther,€the€partiesðð€intent€that€the€alimony€not€be€subject€to€later€modification,€byÐ pÀ Ðeither€party,€was€made€explicitly€clear.€€Ô‡ XEéXXXEéÔThe€non„modification€provision€provided€both€parties€withÐ \¬ Ðcertainty€and€finality€to€allow€them€to€make€financial€decisions€reliably.€€In€addition,€the€partiesÐ H˜ Ðchose€to€place€no€conditions€or€contingencies€on€the€receipt€of€the€alimony.òò€Idóó.€at€363;€òòÔ_ÔIsbellÔ_Ôóó,€816Ð 4„ ÐS.W.2d€at€739.€€On€the€contrary,€their€agreement€specifies€that€the€alimony€obligation€is€to€continueÐ  p Ðfor€a€period€of€twenty€years€without€modification€or€termination.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEé º#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔAlthough€the€total€amount€of€theÐ  \ Ðalimony€award€is€not€stated€in€the€agreement,€simple€arithmetic€can€determine€how€much€FatherÐ øH Ðagreed€to€pay€when€he€entered€the€agreement.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEét¼#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔMoreover,€by€the€terms€of€the€MDA,€ð ðShould€thereÐ ä4 Ðbe€any€obligation,€alimony,€child€support€or€other,€due€in€the€future,€after€the€death€of€[Father],€theÐ Ð  Ðchildren€and€[Mother]€shall€have€a€claim€against€the€estate€of€[Father]€for€monies€due€in€the€futureÐ ¼  Ðunder€this€agreement.ððÔ#†XEéXX XE鋽#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ׃' ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ¨ø ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEé#¿#Ô€Ô‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ”ä Ðà  àIn€light€of€all€of€the€above,€we€find€that€the€"rehabilitative"€support€provided€for€in€the€parties'Ð €Ð Ðmarital€dissolution€agreement€was€non„modifiable.Ô#†XEéXX XEéÏ¿#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€It€cannot€be€subjected€to€a€later€statute€in€suchÐ l¼ Ða€way€as€to€change€Fatherððs€obligation€or€to€affect€Motherððs€right€to€receive€the€amount€of€alimonyÐ X ¨ Ðfor€the€duration€provided€in€the€partiesðð€agreement.€Ð D!” ÐÐ 0"€  Ðà  àIn€addition,€it€is€clear€that€the€agreement€was€the€product€of€negotiation€between€the€parties.€Ð ° ÐWhile€the€language€prevents€Father€from€seeking€reduction€or€termination,€it€also€prevents€MotherÐ œì Ðfrom€seeking€an€increase€in€amount€or€duration.€€Apparently€the€duration€of€the€alimony€paymentsÐ ˆØ Ðwas€set€at€twenty€years€in€consideration€of€Motherððs€relinquishment€of€€any€claim€to€Fatherððs€medicalÐ tÄ Ðpractice€and€related€property€and€to€his€retirement€accounts.Ô#†XEéXX XEéÜÀ#Ô׃D×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð `° ÐÌÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔà  àWhere€the€parties€see€fit€to€include€alimony€obligations€in€their€marital€dissolutionÐ 8 ˆ Ðagreement,€Ð $ t ÐÌà8  àIt€must€be€presumed€that€the€alimony€provision€was€part€of€the€inducement€orÐ ü L  Ðconsideration€for€the€other€provisions€regarding€division€of€the€marital€estate.€€TheÐ è 8  ÐCourts€are€justified€in€being€reluctant€to€disturb€an€alimony€obligation€assumed€underÐ Ô$  Ðsuch€conditions.ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòCampbell€v.€Campbellóó,€No.€02A01„9803„CH„00073,€1998€WL€959669€at€*5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.Ð ˜è  Ð4,€1998)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€11€application€filed)€(quoting€òòÔ_ÔLampleyÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔLampleyÔ_Ôóó,€No.€01A01„9708„CH„Ð „Ô  Ð00423,€1998€WL€44938,€at€*5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Feb.€6,€1998)€(perm.€app.€denied€July€27,€1998)).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àSimilarly,€in€òòHolt€v.€Holtóó,€751€S.W.2d€426€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1988),€this€court€considered€aÐ H˜ Ðformer€husbandððs€attempts€to€be€relieved€of€obligations€established€in€a€property€settlementÐ 4„ Ðagreement€which€provided€for€10€years€of€payments€of€alimonyòò€inóó€òòsolidoóó.׃=Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€In€determining€that€theÐ  p Ðagreement€did€not€violate€public€policy,€this€court€also€stated:Ð  \ ÐÌà8  àParties€should€be€free€to€obligate€themselves€by€agreement€beyond€what€the€courtsÐ ä4 Ðcould€order€them€to€do€as€a€matter€of€law.€€In€such€cases€the€courts€are€notÐ Ð  Ðsympathetic€to€a€party€who€promises€more€than€he€can€reasonably€expect€to€pay€inÐ ¼  Ðorder€to€induce€the€other€spouse€to€obtain€a€divorce€and€then€seeks€the€terminationÐ ¨ø Ðof€the€agreed€payments.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌòòHoltóó,€751€S.W.2d€at€428€(citations€omitted).Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€modify€Fatherððs€alimony€obligation.ò ò€€òòó óSee€Ô_ÔHutchersonÔ_ÔÐ D!” Ðv.€Ô_ÔCrinerÔ_Ôóó,€11€S.W.3d€126,€136€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999)€(ð ðThis€Court€will€affirm€a€decree€correct€inÐ 4"„  Ðresult€but€rendered€upon€different€.€.€.€grounds.ðð).€€€Ô#†XEéXXXEéÙÄ#ÔÐ  #p! ÐÐ  $\" ÐÓ  ÓII.€Child€Support€TrustÐ ° ÐÌÓ­ÎÓÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔà  àFather€also€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€require€a€portion€of€child€support€to€paid€intoÐ ˆØ Ða€trust€for€the€benefit€of€the€children.׃F×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Father€argues€that€some€of€the€child€support€money€shouldÐ tÄ Ðbe€sequestered€from€access€by€Mother€because€ð ðthere€is€a€tremendous€amount€of€money€that€isÐ `° Ðflowing€in€her€direction€that€is€being€used€by€her€and€her€current€husband.ðð€€Ð L œ ÐÌÓ  ÓA.€What€Portion€is€AllocableÐ $ t ÐÓ?ÑÓÌà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€by€attempting€to€define€what€portion,€if€any,€of€the€child€supportÐ ü L  ÐFather€pays€is€subject€to€apportionment€to€a€trust.€€Any€amounts€of€support€that€are€not€legallyÐ è 8  Ðmandated€but€are€imposed€solely€by€the€MDA,€are€not€subject€to€revision€by€the€court.€€That€includesÐ Ô$  ÐFatherððs€agreement€to€pay€support€and€college€expenses€beyond€the€date€each€child€reaches€the€ageÐ À  Ðof€majority€and€graduates€from€high€school.€€òòSandusky€v.€Sanduskyóó,€No.€M2000„00288„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CVÐ ¬ü  Ð2001€WL€327898,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€5,€2001)€(parent€is€required€to€support€child€until€laterÐ ˜è  Ðof€eighteenth€birthday€or€the€graduation€of€the€class€to€which€child€belongs).Ð „Ô  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXXXEéöÎ#ÔÔ‡#XEéXXXEéÔà  àWhile€it€is€generally€true€that€a€parent€cannot€be€ordered€by€the€courts€to€pay€child€supportÐ \¬ Ðfor€an€adult€child,€òòBlackburn€v.€Blackburnóó,€526€S.W.2d€463,€465€(Tenn.€1975);€òòÔ_ÔGareyÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔGareyÔ_Ôóó,€482Ð H˜ ÐS.W.2d€133,€135€(Tenn.€1972),€a€party€to€a€divorce€may€by€agreement€obligate€himself€or€herselfÐ 4„ Ðbeyond€the€support€duties€imposed€by€law.€€Such€a€provision€in€an€agreement€constitutes€"aÐ  p Ðcontractual€obligation€outside€the€scope€of€the€legal€duty€of€support€during€minority€and€retains€itsÐ  \ Ðcontractual€nature,€although€incorporated€in€a€final€decree€of€divorce."òòóóÔ#†XEéXX#XEéÕ#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔ€€Ô#†XEéXXXEé1Ø#ÔÔ‡#XEéXXXEéÔòòÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ô€v.óó€òòÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ô,€óó521Ð øH ÐS.W.2d€222,€224„25€(Tenn.€1975);€òòBlackburnóó,€526€S.W.2d€at€465.€€Any€voluntarily€assumedÐ ä4 Ðobligation€exceeding€the€minimum€child€support€required€by€statute€is€based€on€the€partiesðð€contract,Ð Ð  Ðenforceable€as€a€contractual€obligation,€and€controlled€exclusively€by€the€agreement.€€òòHaas€v.€Haasóó,Ð ¼  ÐNo.€02A01„9604„CV„00073,€1997€WL€194852,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€22,€1997)€(no€Tenn.€R.Ð ¨ø ÐApp.€R.11€application€filed).€€A€parentððs€agreements€to€pay€college€expenses€as€well€as€to€provideÐ ”ä Ðsupport€beyond€majority€are€contractual€obligations€for€which€the€parent€has€no€legal€duty€and€whichÐ €Ð Ðare€not€subject€to€modification€by€the€courts.€€òòÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ôóó,€521€S.W.2d€at€224„25;òò€Ô_ÔDorrisÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔDorrisÔ_Ôóó,€No.Ð l¼ Ð01A01„9304„CV„00170,€1993€WL€380778,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€29,€1993)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.Ð X ¨ ÐP.€11€application€filed)€(the€trial€court€has€no€statutory€power€to€award€child€support€beyond€the€ageÐ D!” Ðof€majority€and€no€continuing€power€to€modify€such€support).Ð 0"€  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXX#XEéuØ#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔà  àIn€this€case,€Fatherððs€agreements€to€provide€support€until€each€child€reaches€twenty„two€andÐ $X" Ðto€also€pay€for€college€expenses€remain€enforceable€as€contractual€provisions,€and€are€not€modifiableÐ ô$D # Ðby€the€courts€as€child€support€obligations€imposed€by€law.òòóó€€That€limitation€applies€not€only€to€theÐ à%0!$ Ðamount€agreed€to€be€paid,€but€also€to€the€arrangement€established€in€the€contract.€€ð ðThe€courts€mayÐ ° Ðnot€make€a€new€contract€for€parties€who€have€spoken€for€themselves€and€may€not€relieve€parties€ofÐ œì Ðthe€contractual€obligations€simply€because€these€obligations€later€prove€to€be€burdensome€orÐ ˆØ Ðunwise.ðð€€òòMarshall€v.€Jackson€&€Jones€Oils,€Inc.óó,€20€S.W.3d€678,€682€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999)Ð tÄ Ð(citations€omitted).€€Therefore,€Fatherððs€request€to€modify€the€amount€of€child€support€going€directlyÐ `° Ðto€Mother€can€only€relate€to€the€child€support€due€for€each€child€until€he€or€she€reaches€the€age€ofÐ L œ Ðeighteen€and€graduates€from€high€school.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€The€Child€Support€Guidelinesðð€Definition€of€Amount€Allocable€to€TrustÐ  ` ÐÓÉâÓÌà  àThe€parties€modified€their€original€MDA€in€1996,€and€the€trial€court€entered€a€consent€orderÐ è 8  Ðto€reflect€those€modifications.€€Essentially,€Father€agreed€to€pay€an€additional€$300€per€week€in€childÐ Ô$  Ðsupport€in€exchange€for€release€from€certain€other€obligations.€€That€modification€resulted€in€FatherððsÐ À  Ðsupport€obligation€for€three€children€being€set€at€$2,050€per€week,€which€converts€to€a€monthlyÐ ¬ü  Ðobligation€of€$8,883.33.€€Using€the€formula€set€out€in€the€guidelines,€that€amount€would€beÐ ˜è  Ðappropriate€for€three€children€of€a€parent€whose€monthly€net€income,€calculated€according€to€theÐ „Ô  Ðguidelines,€was€$21,665.€€Father€sets€his€net€income€for€1997€at€$334,912,€which€converts€toÐ pÀ Ðmonthly€net€income€of€$27,909.€€He€acknowledges€that€his€monthly€support€obligation€for€threeÐ \¬ Ðchildren,€if€the€guidelinesðð€percentage€were€strictly€applied€to€his€total€net€income€without€deviation,Ð H˜ Ðwould€be€$11,442.75€per€month.׃$×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àFather€asserts€that€the€amount€of€support€he€pays€over€the€amount€due€under€the€guidelinesÐ  \ Ðon€net€income€over€$10,000€per€month€is€subject€to€being€placed€in€trust,€relying€upon€a€provisionÐ øH Ðof€the€guidelines€relating€to€high€income€obligor€parents,€which,€after€an€amendment€effectiveÐ ä4 ÐOctober€5,€1997,€provides:Ð Ð  ÐÔ#†XEéXXXEé"Þ#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÌà8  àThe€court€must€consider€all€net€income€of€the€obligor€as€defined€according€to€1240„2„Ð ¨ø Ð4„.03€of€this€rule.€€The€court€must€order€child€support€based€upon€the€appropriateÐ ”ä Ðpercentage€to€the€custodial€parent€up€to€a€net€$10,000€per€month€of€the€obligorððsÐ €Ð Ðincome.€€€When€the€net€income€of€the€obligor€exceeds€$10,000€per€month,€the€courtÐ l¼ Ðmay€consider€a€downward€deviation€from€the€guidelines€if€the€obligor€demonstratesÐ X ¨ Ðthat€the€percentage€applied€to€the€excess€of€the€net€income€above€$10,000€a€monthÐ D!” Ðexceeds€a€reasonable€amount€of€child€support€based€upon€the€best€interest€of€the€childÐ 0"€  Ðand€the€circumstances€of€the€parties.€€The€court€may€require€that€sums€paid€above€theÐ #l! Ðpercentage€applied€to€the€net€income€above€$10,000€be€placed€in€an€educational€orÐ $X" Ðother€trust€fund€for€the€benefit€of€the€child.€Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ЇTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Ô_ÔRegsÔ_Ô.,€ch.€1240-2-4-.04(3).€€€Ô#†XEéXX XEéºé#ÔÔ‡XEéXXXEéÔÐ ° ÐÌà  àThus,€under€the€1997€version,€the€court€may€make€a€downward€deviation€in€the€amount€ofÐ ˆØ Ðsupport€after€ð ðconsideringðð€all€net€income,€but€not€below€the€amount€based€on€$10,000€monthly€netÐ tÄ Ðincome,€if€the€obligor€demonstrates€that€support€based€on€the€total€amount€ð ðexceeds€a€reasonableÐ `° Ðamount€of€child€support€based€upon€the€best€interest€of€the€child€and€the€circumstances€of€theÐ L œ Ðparties.ðð׃+×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Father€does€not€argue,€however,€€that€his€total€child€support€amount€should€be€reduced;Ð 8 ˆ Ðinstead€he€argues€that€some€portion€of€it€should€be€placed€into€trust.€€Assuming€that€the€amount€ofÐ $ t ÐFatherððs€current€child€support€obligation€is€the€product€of€application€of€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Ô_ÔRegsÔ_Ô,Ð  ` Ðch.€1240„2„4„.04(3),׃, ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€amount€subject€to€allocation€to€a€trust€fund€is€that€portion€of€the€supportÐ ü L  Ðwhich€is€greater€than€the€amount€Father€would€be€required€to€pay€based€on€a€net€income€of€$10,000Ð è 8  Ðper€month,€$4100€per€month.Ô#†XEéXXXEéNî#ÔÔ‡#XEéXXXEéÔÐ Ô$  ÐÔ#†XEéXX#XEéÁó#ÔÌà@ìàC.€Trust€is€DiscretionaryˆÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àHaving€determined€that€the€trial€court€has€authority€to€require€that€some€portion€of€FatherððsÐ „Ô  Ðsupport€payments€be€placed€in€an€educational€or€other€trust€fund€for€the€benefit€of€the€children,€weÐ pÀ Ðnow€review€the€trial€courtððs€decision€not€to€exercise€that€authority.€€The€relevant€sentence€of€theÐ \¬ Ðguidelines€states€that€ð ðthe€court€may€requireðð€payments€into€a€trust.€€This€language€does€not€differÐ H˜ Ðsubstantively€from€the€pre„1994€versionððs€ð ðthese€cases€may€requireðð€or€the€1994€amendmentððs€ð ðtheÐ 4„ Ðcourt€may€establishðð€and€gives€wide€latitude€to€the€trial€in€making€that€decision.€€The€establishmentÐ  p Ðof€a€trust€for€educational€or€other€purposes€for€the€benefit€of€a€child€is€a€discretionary€mechanism€orÐ  \ Ðalternative€arrangement€that€is€available€to€the€trial€court€in€fashioning€a€support€award€for€theÐ øH Ðbenefit€of€the€child.€€òòNash€v.€Ô_ÔMulleÔ_Ôóó,€846€S.W.2d€803,€806€(Tenn.€1993);€òòÔ_ÔAndertonÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔAndertonÔ_Ôóó,€988Ð ä4 ÐS.W.2d€675,€681€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);€òòSmith€v.€Smithóó,€No.€01A01„9809„CH„00515,€1999€WLÐ ° Ð548568,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€29,€1999)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€fact€that€a€decision€is€discretionary€necessarily€implies€that€the€trial€court€has€a€choiceÐ tÄ Ðof€alternatives€among€a€range€of€acceptable€ones;€our€role€is€to€determine€whether€the€trial€courtððsÐ `° Ðdecision€is€within€that€range,€based€upon€applicable€legal€principles€and€the€evidence.€€RegardingÐ L œ Ðthe€issue€before€us,€the€applicable€legal€principles€are€found€in€the€guidelines,€the€goals€of€childÐ 8 ˆ Ðsupport,€and€the€goals€behind€establishing€such€a€trust.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€òòNash€v.€Ô_ÔMulleÔ_Ôóó,€the€Supreme€Court€considered€the€use€of€an€educational€trust€fund€as€aÐ ü L  Ðcomponent€of€child€support€for€a€high€income€obligor€parent.€€The€court€found€that€such€a€trust€wasÐ è 8  Ðone€mechanism€available€to€further€the€goals€of€the€guidelines€and€other€specific€goals€such€asÐ Ô$  Ðprotection€for€the€child€from€an€uncaring€non„custodial€parent,€preserving€for€the€child€theÐ À  Ðopportunity€to€pursue€higher€education€since€the€obligor€parent€is€not€otherwise€required€to€fund€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðpursuit,€and€minimizing€an€unintended€windfall€to€the€custodial€parent.€€846€S.W.2d€at€807„09.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àNeither€of€the€first€two€of€the€listed€goals€is€applicable€in€this€case.€€At€the€hearing€FatherÐ pÀ Ðtestified€that€he€wanted€half€his€support€payments€placed€in€trust€for€private€school,€college,Ð \¬ Ðautomobiles,€ð ðanything€thatððs€not€needed€for€day€to€day€needs,ðð€and€that€if€the€trust€could€not€fundÐ H˜ Ðcollege€or€other€expenses€fully€he€would€pay€the€difference.€€However,€Father€is€already€contractuallyÐ 4„ Ðobligated€to€provide€those€expenses,€including€support€and€college€expenses€after€the€children€reachÐ  p Ðeighteen€if€they€are€enrolled€in€college.€€Thus,€although€Father€maintained€he€was€not€seeking€aÐ  \ Ðreduction€in€the€amount€of€support€he€was€providing,€he€was€in€fact€asking€that€a€portion€of€thatÐ øH Ðsupport€be€set€aside€to€defray€expenses€he€was€otherwise€obligated€to€pay.€€We€are€not€convincedÐ ä4 Ðthere€is€a€real€difference.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€Father€focuses€his€argument€on€the€avoidance€of€a€financial€windfall€to€Mother.€Ð ¨ø ÐHe€argues€that€the€entire€amount€of€support€he€provides€is€not€needed€for€support€of€the€children€andÐ ”ä Ðthat€Mother€and€her€new€husband€may€get€the€benefit€of€any€amount€above€that€necessary.€€FatherÐ €Ð Ðasserts€that€Mother€was€unable€to€provide€real€documentation€for€monthly€expenses€exceedingÐ l¼ Ð$4,000.׃/×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mother,€however,€submitted€an€itemized€expense€form€claiming€monthly€expenses€of€overÐ X ¨ Ð$14,000€and€allocated€$9,300€of€that€to€the€children.׃0Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Father€insists€that€with€these€claimed,€butÐ D!” Ðundocumented,€€expenditures€and€Motherððs€remarriage€ð ðto€an€individual€with€a€modest€income,ðð€theÐ 0"€  Ðcourt€should€ensure€ð ðthat€the€funds€being€paid€as€child€support€only€benefit€the€children,€rather€thanÐ #l! Ðbeing€used€to€enhance€Mrs.€Bryanððs€enormous€stock€portfolios,€or€to€be€used€for€some€purchase€ofÐ $X" Ðan€asset€to€be€shared€with€Mr.€Bryan.ðð€€He€concludes€that€half€the€support€he€pays€will€more€thanÐ ô$D # Ðadequately€meet€the€needs€of€his€three€children.Ð à%0!$ Їà  àIn€òòNash€v.€Ô_ÔMulleÔ_Ôóó,€the€Supreme€Court€discussed€the€analysis€a€trial€court€should€use€inÐ ° Ðdetermining€how€to€set€the€child€support€obligation€of€a€parent€whose€monthly€net€income€exceedsÐ œì Ð$6,250€(now€$10,000)€per€month.€€The€court€noted€that€one€of€the€major€goals€expressed€in€theÐ ˆØ Ðguidelines€is€ð ðto€ensure€that€when€parents€live€separately,€the€economic€impact€on€the€child(Ô_ÔrenÔ_Ô)€isÐ tÄ Ðminimized€and€to€the€extent€that€either€parent€enjoys€a€higher€standard€of€living,€the€child(Ô_ÔrenÔ_Ô)Ð `° Ðshare(s)€in€that€higher€standard.ðð€€846€S.W.2d€at€804„05.€€The€court€further€stated:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àIt€reminds€us€that€Tennessee€does€not€define€a€childððs€need€literally,€but€ratherÐ $ t Ðrequires€an€award€to€reflect€both€parentsðð€financial€circumstances.€€This€goal€isÐ  ` Ðconsistent€with€our€long€established€common€law€rule,€which€requires€that€a€parentÐ ü L  Ðmust€provide€support€ð ðin€a€manner€commensurate€with€his€means€and€station€in€life.ðð€Ð è 8  Ðà@oo(ìÐ Ð à.€.€.ˆÐ Ô$  Ðà8  àLong„standing€Tennessee€law€requires€the€courts€to€evaluate€childrenððs€needs€not€inÐ À  Ðterms€of€lifeððs€essentials,€but€in€terms€of€the€parentsðð€ð ðmeans€and€station€in€life.ððЬü Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€805,€808€(citations€omitted).Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€court€also€noted€that€it€would€be€unfair€to€require€a€custodial€parent€to€prove€a€specificÐ \¬ Ðneed€before€the€court€would€set€support€at€an€amount€above€that€due€on€$10,000€(then€$6,250)Ð H˜ Ðmonthly€net€income,€and€stated:€ð ðAt€such€high€income€levels,€parents€are€unlikely€to€be€able€toÐ 4„ Ðð ðitemizeðð€the€cost€of€living.ðð€òòIdóó.€at€806.Ð  p ÐÌà  àFatherððs€attempts€to€establish€that€any€amount€above€$4,000€per€month€is€unreasonable€sufferÐ øH Ðfrom€his€testimony€regarding€his€own€expenditures€on€his€current€household€which€includes€his€newÐ ä4 Ðwife€and€her€two€daughters.€€Those€children€are€given€their€own€fatherððs€child€support€of€$700€perÐ Ð  Ðmonth€as€spending€money.€€Father€and€his€new€family€spend€approximately€$24,000€per€month,€andÐ ¼  Ðhe€testified€that€he€thinks€spending€$22,000€to€$24,000€per€month€to€support€four€people€isÐ ¨ø Ðreasonable.׃1×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ”ä ÐÌà0  àIn€its€October€1998€order,€the€trial€court€stated:Ðl¼(#(# ÐÌà8  àThe€Defendant€argues€that€a€portion€of€the€amount€of€child€support€should€be€placedÐ D!” Ðin€a€trust€fund€for€the€children.€€The€Guidelines€were€amended€in€December€of€1994Ð 0"€  Ðto€allow€the€Court€discretion€to€place€certain€amounts€into€a€trust€fund€for€theÐ #l! Ðchildren.€€However,€some€eighteen€months€after€the€Guidelines€were€amended,€theÐ $X" ÐDefendant€felt€the€amounts€of€child€support€were€reasonable€and€needed€by€theÐ ô$D # ÐPlaintiff€and€should€not€be€placed€in€trust.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€court€was€referring€to€the€June€4,€1996,€consent€order€wherein€the€parties€agreed€toÐ ¸'#& Ðmodify€their€marital€dissolution€agreement€as€part€of€a€compromise€and€settlement€of€variousÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdisputes.€€At€trial,€Father€testified€that€he€thought€the€amount€he€agreed€to,€$2,050€per€week,€wasÐ ° Ðreasonable€and€fair€at€the€time€he€made€the€agreement.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€trial€court€acted€well€within€its€discretion€in€denying€Fatherððs€request€thatÐ tÄ Ðsome€of€his€support€payments€be€placed€in€a€trust.€€Ð `° ÐÌà8  àUnder€the€abuse€of€discretion€standard,€a€trial€courtððs€ruling€ð ðwill€be€upheld€so€longÐ 8 ˆ Ðas€reasonable€minds€can€disagree€as€to€propriety€of€the€decision€made.ðð€€òòState€v.Ð $ t ÐScottóó,òò€óó33€S.W.3d€746,€752€(Tenn.€2000);€òò€State€v.€Ô_ÔGillilandÔ_Ôóó,€22€S.W.3d€266,€273Ð  ` Ð(Tenn.€2000).€€A€trial€court€abuses€its€discretion€only€when€it€ð ðÔ_Ôapplie[sÔ_Ô]€an€incorrectÐ ü L  Ðlegal€standard,€or€Ô_Ôreache[sÔ_Ô]€a€decision€which€is€against€logic€or€reasoning€thatÐ è 8  ÐÔ_Ôcause[sÔ_Ô]€an€injustice€to€the€party€complaining.ðð€€The€abuse€of€discretion€standardÐ Ô$  Ðdoes€not€permit€the€appellate€court€to€substitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€the€trialÐ À  Ðcourt.Ьü Ð Ð  ÐòòÌÔ_ÔEldridgeÔ_Ôóó€òòv.€Ô_ÔEldridgeÔ_Ôóó,€__€S.W.3d€__,€No.€E1999„02583„SC„R11„CV,€2001€WL€455876,€at€*2€(Tenn.Ð „Ô  ÐMay€2,€2001).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€decision€was€based€on€the€correct€legal€standard€and€was€supported€byÐ H˜ Ðevidence.€€We€affirm€the€refusal€to€order€a€trust€for€a€portion€of€the€child€support.Ð 4„ ÐÌà@¹¹#ìàIII.€€ContemptˆÐ  \ ÐÌÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àThe€trial€courtððs€order€of€May€28,€1998€found€Father€to€be€in€contempt€for€his€failure€to€payÐ ä4 Ðor€reimburse€Mother€for€medical€and€educational€expenses€of€$5,581.92€as€previously€ordered.Ô_Ô׃2×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€Ð Ð  ÐThe€court€declined€to€find€Father€in€contempt€regarding€the€child€support€Father€had€failed€to€payÐ ¼  Ðafter€the€older€daughter,€Clara,€had€returned€to€her€motherððs€home€in€1997.€€The€trial€court€stated€thatÐ ¨ø Ðhad€Mother€filed€an€appropriate€petition€in€1997,€the€court€could€have€restored€the€amount€of€theÐ ”ä Ðsupport€obligation.€€€€The€court€was€later€Ô_ÔapprisedÔ_Ô€of€the€fact€that€Mother€had€filed€such€a€petitionÐ €Ð Ðin€March€1997,€Ô#†XEéXX XEéX#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔand€Mother€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend,€attaching€an€agreement€by€the€partiesÐ l¼ Ðthat€the€child€support€amount€awarded€after€hearing€would€be€retroactive€to€February€23,€1997.€€AnÐ X ¨ Ðorder€was€entered€July€27,€1998€awarding€Mother€$46,200€for€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€on€the€child€support€basedÐ D!” Ðon€the€older€daughterððs€return€to€Motherððs€home€and€custody.׃3Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð 0"€  ЇÔ#†XEéXX XEé"#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àFollowing€those€orders,€Father€did€not€make€the€payments€as€ordered;€instead€he€sought€aÐ ° Ðstay€pending€appeal.€Nor€did€he€pay€other€expenses€which€arose€following€the€orders.€€Mother€filedÐ œì Ðanother€petition€for€contempt,€which€she€amended€to€include€later€arising€expenses,€seeking€anÐ ˆØ Ðadditional€$6,516.71.׃9×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€hearing€was€held€on€August€28,€1998.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEéz$#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThe€court€heard€arguments€ofÐ tÄ Ðcounsel,€but€did€not€take€testimony.€€Fatherððs€counsel€attempted€to€reargue€Motherððs€lack€of€ð ðneedððÐ `° Ðfor€the€child€support,€and€stated€that€ð ðdisagreementðð€existed€between€the€parties€regarding€theÐ L œ Ðamounts€owed.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEé´&#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔMotherððs€counsel€submitted€an€exhibit€which€itemized€the€expenses€Father€hadÐ 8 ˆ Ðfailed€to€pay.€€Motherððs€counsel€alleged,€and€the€trial€court€found,€that€Father€owed€her€the€followingÐ $ t Ðpayments€pursuant€to€the€MDA:€€Claraððs€auto€expenses,€$1,116.25;€Ô#†XEéXX XEé4(#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔschool€expenses€for€Mary€andÐ  ` ÐDavid,€$4,727.25;€Ô#†XEéXX XEé)#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔmedical€expenses€for€children,€$403.21;Ô#†XEéXX XEé"*#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔand€life€insurance€on€Mother,€$270.00,Ð ü L  Ðfor€a€total€of€Ô#†XEéXX XEé‹*#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ$6,516.71Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àFollowing€the€arguments,€the€court€issued€an€order€finding€Father€to€be€inÔ#†XEéXX XEé+#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€ð ðwillful€contemptÐ À  Ðof€the€Orders€of€this€Court€for€his€failure€to€pay€these€items.ðð€€The€court€then€declined€FatherððsÐ ¬ü  Ðmotion€to€stay€its€May€order€regarding€similar€expenses€and€his€motion€to€place€the€$46,200€childÐ ˜è  Ðsupport€arrearages€into€a€trust€account.€€Mother€was€awarded€a€judgment€against€Father€for€theÐ „Ô  Ð$6,516.71.׃4¤×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€court€then€ordered,€ð ðFor€each€and€every€day€that€[Father]€fails€to€pay€thisÐ pÀ ÐJudgment,€and€the€amount€of€the€previous€Judgments€entered€in€this€cause,€[Father]€shall€be€finedÐ \¬ Ðthe€sum€of€One€Hundred€($100.00)€Dollars€per€day€until€the€amounts€are€paid€in€full.ðð€€The€courtÐ H˜ Ðordered€Father€to€pay€the€deficiency€of€child€support€to€Mother€ð ðimmediately,€the€failure€[of]€whichÐ 4„ Ðshall€likewise€be€covered€by€the€fine€as€set€forth€above.ðð€€The€court€stated,€ð ðThe€Court€will€notÐ  p Ðcontinue€to€allow€[Father]€to€disregard€agreements€previously€made€by€him€and€the€Orders€of€thisÐ  \ ÐCourt,€and€any€future€failure€of€[Father]€to€comply€with€the€Orders€of€this€Court€will€be€dealt€withÐ øH Ðharshly.ððÐ ä4 ÐÌÔ#†XEéXX XEéÎ+#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àOn€appeal,€Father€raises€several€ð ðconcernsðð€about€the€authority€of€the€court€to€impose€theÐ ¼  Ðcontempt€sanctions.Ô#†XEéXX XEé]1#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ׃50×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XEéXX XEé32#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéԀР¨ø ÐÐ ”ä ÐÓ  ÓA.€€Conduct€Subject€to€ContemptÐ ° ÐÓ3ÓÌà  àOur€Supreme€Court€has€determined€that€the€courts€of€this€state€do€not€have€unlimited€€powersÐ ˆØ Ðof€contempt,€holding€that€those€inherent€powers€have€been€limited€by€statute:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔT]heÔ_Ô€inherent€power€of€courts€to€punish€contemptuous€conduct€has€long€beenÐ L œ Ðregarded€as€essential€to€the€protection€and€existence€of€the€courts.€Indeed,€at€commonÐ 8 ˆ Ðlaw,€the€power€of€courts€to€punish€Ô_ÔcontemptsÔ_Ô€was€vast€and€undefined.€BecauseÐ $ t Ðunlimited,€undefined€discretionary€power€carried€with€it€the€potential€for€abuse,Ð  ` Ðspecific€statutory€provisions€were€adopted€to€limit€and€define€the€conduct€punishableÐ ü L  Ðby€contempt.€.€.€.€Conduct€punishable€as€contempt€in€Tennessee€now€is€delineated€inÐ è 8  ÐTenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€29-9-102€.€.€.€.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòBlack€v.€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ôóó,€938€S.W.2d€394,€397€(Tenn.€1996)€(citations€omitted).Ô#†XEéXX XEéÉ2#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€statute€which€delineates€the€conduct€punishable€by€contempt€provides:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àThe€power€of€the€several€courts€to€issue€attachments,€and€inflict€punishments€forÐ \¬ ÐÔ_ÔcontemptsÔ_Ô€of€court,€shall€not€be€construed€to€extend€to€any€except€the€followingÐ H˜ Ðcases:€.€.€.€Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(3)€The€willful€disobedience€or€resistance€of€any€officer€of€the€said€courts,€party,Ð  \ Ðjuror,€witness,€or€any€other€person,€to€any€lawful€writ,€process,€order,€rule,€decree,€orÐ øH Ðcommand€of€said€courts€.€.€.€.Ðä4Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„102.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àWhile€Father€challenges€the€courtððs€authority€in€several€specifics,€none€really€disputes€theÐ ”ä Ðfinding€that€he€was€in€willful€disobedience€of€the€courtððs€prior€orders.€Much€of€Fatherððs€argumentÐ €Ð Ðrests€upon€his€characterization€of€the€type€of€contempt€involved€herein€as€criminal.€€Father€isÐ l¼ Ðmistaken€in€that€regard.€€As€the€Supreme€Court€has€explained:Ð X ¨ ÐÔ#†XEéXX XEéÉ7#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÌà8  àÔ_ÔContemptsÔ_Ô€may€be€either€criminal€or€civil€in€nature.€€Civil€contempt€occurs€when€aÐ 0"€  Ðperson€refuses€or€fails€to€comply€with€a€court€order€and€a€contempt€action€is€broughtÐ #l! Ðto€enforce€private€rights.òò€óó€If€imprisonment€is€ordered€in€a€civil€contempt€case,€it€isÐ $X" Ðremedial€and€coercive€in€character,€designed€to€compel€the€contemnor€to€comply€withÐ ô$D # Ðthe€court's€order.€Compliance€will€result€in€immediate€release€from€prison.€Therefore,Ð à%0!$ Ðit€has€often€been€said€that€in€a€civil€contempt€case,€the€contemnor€"carries€the€keysÐ Ì&"% Ðto€his€prison€in€his€own€pocket.€.€.€."и'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àCriminal€Ô_ÔcontemptsÔ_Ô,€on€the€other€hand,€are€intended€to€preserve€the€power€andÐ )à$( Ðvindicate€the€dignity€and€authority€of€the€law,€and€the€court€as€an€organ€of€society.Ð |*Ì%) ÐòòóóTherefore,€sanctions€for€criminal€contempt€are€generally€both€punitive€andÐ h+¸&* Ðunconditional€in€nature.€òòóó€While€criminal€Ô_ÔcontemptsÔ_Ô€may€arise€in€the€course€of€privateÐ ° Ðcivil€litigation,€such€proceedings,€"in€a€very€true€sense€raise€an€issue€between€theÐ œì Ðpublic€and€the€accused.ðð€€In€the€trial€of€a€criminal€contempt€case,€therefore,€guilt€ofÐ ˆØ Ðthe€accused€must€be€established€by€proof€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.òòóóÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌòòBlackóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€398€(citations€omitted).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àTraditionally,€contempt€has€been€classified€as€civil€or€criminal€depending€upon€the€actionÐ $ t Ðtaken€by€the€court€to€address€the€contempt.€€òòÔ_ÔAhernÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔAhernÔ_Ôóó,€15€S.W.3d€73,€78€(Tenn.€2000).Ô#†XEéXX XEéÈ<#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€ð ðA€civilÐ  ` Ðcontempt€is€one€where€a€person€refuses€or€fails€to€comply€with€an€order€of€the€court€and€punishmentÐ ü L  Ðis€meted€out€for€the€benefit€of€a€party€litigant.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔGivlerÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔGivlerÔ_Ôóó,€964€S.W.2d€902,€909€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð è 8  ÐApp.€1997)€(quoting€òòÔ_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€v.€Forest€Lawn€Ô_ÔMemððlÔ_Ô€Gardens,€Inc.óó,€588€S.W.2d€309,€315€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð Ô$  ÐApp.€1979)).Ô#†XEéXX XEéD#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€Because€the€courtððs€order€fining€Father€$100€per€day€was€designed€to€coerce€FatherÐ À  Ðto€pay€the€amounts€ordered,€and€because€Father€could€avoid€the€fine€and€purge€his€contempt€byÐ ¬ü  Ðobeying€the€courtððs€orders,€the€finding€of€contempt€was€clearly€civil€contempt.׃6×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XEéXX XEéõF#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€Ô#†XEéXX XEé»H#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéԀР˜è  ÐÌà8  àAfter€a€finding€of€contempt,€courts€have€several€remedies€available€depending€uponÐ pÀ Ðthe€facts€of€the€case.€€A€court€can€imprison€an€individual€to€compel€performance€ofÐ \¬ Ða€court€order.€€This€is€typically€referred€to€as€ð ðcivil€contempt.ðð€This€remedy€isÐ H˜ Ðavailable€only€when€the€individual€has€the€ability€to€comply€with€the€order€at€the€timeÐ 4„ Ðof€the€contempt€hearing.€€Thus,€with€civil€contempt,€the€one€in€contempt€has€theÐ  p Ðð ðkeys€to€the€jailðð€and€can€purge€the€contempt€by€complying€with€the€courtððs€order.€Ð  \ ÐIn€civil€contempt,€the€imprisonment€is€meted€out€for€the€benefit€of€the€party€litigant.ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌòòÔ_ÔAhernÔ_Ôóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€79.Ð Ð  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXX XEéþH#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔà  àFather€has€consistently€maintained,€and€continues€to€maintain,€that€he€is€financially€capableÐ ¨ø Ðof€paying€the€amounts€agreed€to€by€him€and€ordered€by€the€court.€Thus,€he€had€the€ability€to€complyÐ ”ä Ðwith€the€order€at€the€time€of€the€contempt€hearing,€and€the€court€was€justified€in€finding€him€in€civilÐ €Ð Ðcontempt.€€Ô#†XEéXX XEéªL#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àFather€also€contends€that€contempt€is€not€available€to€enforce€certain€of€the€obligations€heÐ D!” Ðsays€are€included€in€the€amounts€he€failed€to€pay.€€Primary€among€those€are€obligations€he€assertsÐ 0"€  Ðrelate€to€support€for€the€oldest€child€after€her€eighteenth€birthday.€€For€this€proposition,€father€reliesÐ #l! Ðupon€òòÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔPenlandÔ_Ôóó,€521€S.W.2d€222€(Tenn.€1975).€€In€that€case,€the€Supreme€Court€held€thatÐ $X" Ðthe€fatherððs€agreement€to€provide€support€or€specified€expenses€beyond€the€childrenððs€majorityÐ ô$D # Ðretained€its€contractual€nature.€€Consequently,€ð ðà8 @† àMrs.€Ô_ÔPenlandÔ_Ô€or€the€daughters€are€entitled€to€enforceÐ à%0!$ Ðsaid€obligation€by€the€obtaining€of€a€money€judgment,€from€time€to€time,€as€the€obligation€matures,Ð Ì&"% Ðand€for€the€enforcement€thereof€by€execution,€as€provided€by€law.ðð€òòÔ_ÔPenlandÔ_Ôóó,€521€S.W.2d€at€225;€Ð ° Ðòòsee€alsoóó€òòJones€v.€Jonesóó,€503€S.W.2d€924,€929€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973)€(the€motherððs€attempt€to€enforceÐ œì Ðthe€fatherððs€promise€to€support€their€daughter€until€she€finished€college€or€reached€age€22€by€seekingÐ ˆØ Ða€judgment,€not€by€attachment€for€contempt,€indicated€she€was€attempting€to€enforce€a€contractualÐ tÄ Ðobligation).Ô#†XEéXX XEéiN#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ `° ÐÌà  àHowever,€Father€fails€to€specify€what€amount€of€the€total€he€was€ordered€to€pay€is€attributableÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€his€contractual€obligation€to€support€his€children€beyond€the€time€he€is€legally€obligated€to€provideÐ $ t Ðsuch€support.€€He€merely€states€his€older€daughterððs€date€of€birth€as€November€12,€1980,€but€claimsÐ  ` Ðð ðsome€of€the€expenses€charged€will€apply€toward€benefits€which€post„date€her€eighteenth€birthday.ðð€Ð ü L  ÐFather€was€found€to€be€in€contempt€for€failure€to€pay€obligations€as€of€March,€1998,€and€August,Ð è 8  Ð1998.€€Therefore,€we€fail€to€understand€his€reference€to€obligations€beyond€his€daughterððs€majority.€Ð Ô$  ÐFurther,€the€legislature€has€clearly€addressed€arrearages€for€amounts€due€during€the€childððs€minorityÐ À  Ðbut€remaining€unpaid€at€that€time:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àAbsent€a€court€order€to€the€contrary,€if€an€arrearage€for€child€support€or€fees€due€asÐ „Ô  Ðcourt€costs€exist€at€the€time€an€order€for€child€support€would€otherwise€terminate,€theÐ pÀ Ðorder€of€support€.€.€.€and€all€amounts€ordered€for€payment€of€current€support€orÐ \¬ Ðarrears€.€.€.€shall€continue€in€effect€.€.€.€until€the€arrearage€and€costs€due€are€satisfiedÐ H˜ Ðand€the€courtò ò€may€enforce€all€orders€for€such€arrearages€by€contempt.Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðó óÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(k)€(emphasis€added).€€à  àTherefore,€we€find€no€merit€in€FatherððsÐ ` Ðcomplaint€regarding€his€obligations€beyond€his€childrenððs€majority.€Ð üL ÐÌÓ  ÓB.€€Punishment€for€ContemptÐ Ô$ ÐÓ€[ÓÌà  àFather€argues€on€appeal€that€the€trial€court€acted€beyond€its€authority€by€imposing€the€$100Ð ¬ü Ðper€day€penalty.Ô#†XEéXX XEé®T#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€He€contends€that€criminal€contempt€sanctions€are€legally€limited€to€a€€specificÐ ˜è Ðperiod€of€incarceration€and€a€$50€fine€Ô#†XEéXX XEé}\#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔand€that€there€is€no€authority€for€imposition€of€a€$100€per€dayÐ „Ô Ðpenalty,€whether€it€be€for€criminal€or€civil€contempt.€€As€noted€above,€our€Supreme€Court€has€heldÐ pÀ Ðthat€courtsðð€inherent€power€to€punish€by€contempt€has€been€€limited€by€statutes€defining€the€conductÐ \ ¬ Ðwhich€is€subject€to€such€punishment.€òòBlackóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€397.€Ô#†XEéXX XEéL]#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€In€òòÔ_ÔKuykendallÔ_Ô€v.€Wheeleróó,€theÐ H!˜ ÐSupreme€Court€stated€that€the€trial€courtððs€inherent€power€to€enforce€its€orders€remained€intact,€citingÐ 4"„  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð21„1„804.׃7×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€890€S.W.2d€at€787.Ô#†XEéXX XEé_#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€In€addition,€however,€the€Court€held€that€ð ðinÐ  #p! Ðexercising€this€power,€the€trial€court,€as€always,€must€use€only€those€means€which€have€been€grantedÐ  $\" Ðby€the€legislature€or€common€law€tradition.ðð€€òòIdóó.€Ð ø$H # ÐÌà  àÔ#†XEéXX XEé¹`#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔWe€have€determined€that€the€trial€court€acted€within€its€discretion€under€applicable€legalÐ Ð& "% Ðprinciples€and€the€evidence€in€finding€Father€in€contempt€for€willful€disobedience€to€the€courtððsÐ ¼' #& Ðorders.€€Our€statutes€address€the€means€available€to€a€court€in€such€circumstances:Ð ¨(ø#' Їà8  à(a)€If€the€contempt€consists€in€an€omission€to€perform€an€act€which€it€is€yet€in€theÐ ° Ðpower€of€the€person€to€perform,€the€person€may€be€imprisoned€until€such€personÐ œì Ðperforms€it.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  à(b)€The€person€or€if€same€be€a€corporation,€then€such€person€or€corporation€can€beÐ `° Ðseparately€fined,€as€authorized€by€law,€for€each€day€it€is€in€contempt€until€it€performsÐ L œ Ðthe€act€ordered€by€the€court.Ð8 ˆÐ Ð  ÐÌÔ#†XEéXX XEéb#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔTenn€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„104.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àThese€provisions€make€it€clear€that€the€trial€court€could€have€ordered€Father€imprisoned€untilÐ è 8  Ðhe€paid€the€amounts€ordered.€€It€is€also€clear€that€the€statute€authorized€a€fine€against€Father€for€everyÐ Ô$  Ðday€he€was€in€contempt€until€he€complied€with€the€courtððs€order.€€The€amount€of€the€daily€fine€is€theÐ À  Ðquestion.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€statute€directs€that€Father€may€be€ð ðfined,€òòas€authorized€by€lawóó,€for€each€day€[he]€is€inÐ „Ô  Ðcontempt€until€[he]€performs€the€act€ordered€by€the€court.ðð€€òòóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„104(b)Ð pÀ Ð(emphasis€added).€€The€holding€in€òòÔ_ÔKuykendallÔ_Ô€óósuggests€that€such€authority€may€be€found€in€statuteÐ \¬ Ðor€in€common€law.€€One€statutory€source€for€Ô#†XEéXX XEéÌe#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔòòóófines€for€contempt€is€Ô#†XEéXX XEé¤i#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„103,Ð H˜ Ðwhich€provides,€Ô#†XEéXX XEéj#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€punishment€for€contempt€may€be€by€fine€or€by€imprisonment,€or€both.Ô#†XEéXX XEéˆj#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€WhereÐ 4„ Ðnot€otherwise€specially€provided,€the€circuit,€chancery,€and€appellate€courts€are€limited€to€a€fine€ofÐ  p Ðfifty€dollars€($50.00),€and€imprisonment€not€exceeding€ten€(10)€days€.€.€.€.ððÔ#†XEéXX XEé7k#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéԀР \ ÐÌà  àÔ#†XEéXX XEé`l#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThe€relationship€between€this€statute€and€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€€ðð€29„9„104€has€been€describedÐ ä4 Ðas€ð ðnot€mutually€exclusive:ðð€one€sets€out€the€punishment€for€criminal€contumacy€in€resisting€theÐ Ð  Ðestablished€authority€of€the€court,€while€the€other€confers€upon€the€courts€the€essential€powers€ofÐ ¼  Ðcoercion€to€enable€them€to€enforce€their€judgments€and€decrees.òò€Black€v.€Blackóó,€50€Tenn.€App.€455,Ð ¨ø Ð458,€362€S.W.2d€472,€474€(1962)Ô#†XEéXX XEéÅl#Ô.€Both€statutes€allow€courts€to€impose€fines€and€to€imprison,€butÐ ”ä Ðfor€different€purposes.€€The€ten„day€limitation€on€imprisonment€for€criminal€contempt€does€not€applyÐ €Ð Ðto€coercive€imprisonment€for€civil€contempt,€by€the€express€terms€of€the€civil€contempt€statute.€Ð l¼ ÐHowever,€no€such€specific€exemption€from€the€$50€limit€on€fines€is€present€in€the€statute.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àAlthough€a€number€of€specific€statutory€provisions€exist€regarding€enforcement€of€child€andÐ 0"€  Ðspousal€support€awards,€we€have€found€none€that€provide€specific€authority€for€coercive€civilÐ #l! Ðcontempt€fines€above€$50.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð36„5„101(a)(2)(A)€(such€awards€ð ðmay€be€enforcedÐ $X" Ðby€any€appropriate€process€of€the€court€having€jurisdiction€thereofðð);€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„Ð ô$D # Ð101(a)(5)€(unpaid€amounts€become€arrearages€on€date€due€and€accrue€interest);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ à%0!$ Ð36„5„€101(b)€(attachment€and€appearance€bond€for€delinquent€obligor€and€security€bond);€€Tenn.Ð Ì&"% ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€36„5„103€(court€may€require€bond€to€secure€payment,€may€sequester€certain€property,Ð ¸'#& Ðappoint€a€receiver€over€assets€and€income,€place€a€lien€on€property€of€obligor);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ¤(ô#' Ð36„5„901€òòet€seqóó.€(enforcement€of€overdue€support€by€department€of€human€services;€liens).€€InÐ )à$( Ðaddition€to€the€general€contempt€statute,€the€General€Assembly€has€provided€a€specific€statute,€Tenn.Ð |*Ì%) ÐCode€Ann€ðð€36„5„104,€to€address€Ô_ÔobligorsÔ_Ô€who€fail€to€pay€ordered€child€support.€€That€statute€createsÐ h+¸&* Ða€separate€criminal€offense€punishable€by€up€to€six€monthsðð€imprisonment.€€òòBrown€v.€Ô_ÔLathamÔ_Ôóó,€914Ð ° ÐS.W.2d€887,€888€(Tenn.€1996).€It€does€not€affect€the€sanctions€available€for€contempt.Ð œì ÐÌà  àCivil€contempt€sanctions€are€imposed€for€the€benefit€of€a€party€litigant.òò€Ô_ÔAhernÔ_Ô,€óó15€S.W.3dÐ tÄ Ðat€79òò;€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ôóó,€588€S.W.2d€at€315.Ô‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€òòóó€€Ô#†XEéXX XEéÿw#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔThe€purpose€of€such€sanctions€is€to€coerce€compliance€with€aÐ `° Ðprior€court€order;€the€party€seeking€sanctions€benefits€from€that€compliance.Ô#†XEéXX XEéJx#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÔ_Ô׃;×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÔ#†XEéXX XEé*y#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€In€Tennessee,€coerciveÐ L œ Ðcivil€contempt€has€generally€involved€imprisonment€until€the€contemnor€complies€with€the€courtððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðorder,€thus€the€often„made€reference€to€ð ðkeys€to€the€jail.ðð€€In€fact,€we€have€been€unable€to€find€anyÐ $ t Ðprior€authority€in€Tennessee€regarding€coercive€fines€imposed€in€civil€contempt.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àTherefore,€having€found€no€independent€authority€for€a€greater€fine,€we€interpret€the€phrase,Ð è 8  Ðð ðas€authorized€by€law,ðð€to€refer€to€the€prior€section,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„103(b),€whichÐ Ô$  Ðauthorizes€a€fine€of€up€to€$50€for€contempt€of€court.€€Thus,€Father€could€have€been€imprisonedÐ À  Ðindefinitely,€or€fined€$50€per€day,€until€he€paid€the€amounts€ordered.Ô#†XEéXX XEéày#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€€The€penalty€for€noncomplianceÐ ¬ü  Ðwith€the€court€order€is€modified€to€order€a€$50€fine€perÔ#†XEéXX XEé]}#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔ€Ô#†XEéXX XEé ~#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔday.׃8X×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†XEéXX XEéN~#ÔÔ‡ XEéXXXEéÔÐ ˜è  ÐÌÓ  ÓIV.Ð pÀ ÐÓÓÌà  àIn€conclusion,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€modify€the€alimony€award€because€theÐ H˜ Ðcourt€had€no€authority€to€do€so.€€We€also€affirm€the€courtððs€refusal€to€place€some€of€the€child€supportÐ 4„ Ðin€a€trust€fund€because€the€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion.€€We€affirm€the€finding€of€contempt,€butÐ  p Ðreduce€the€coercive€fine€for€civil€contempt€to€$50€for€each€day€Father€fails€to€comply€with€the€courtððsÐ  \ Ðorder.€€This€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary.€Ð ° ÐCosts€are€taxed€to€James€Wendell€Leach€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô#†XEéXX XEéè~#ÔÐ œì ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGEÐ 8 ˆ Ðòòóó