WPCg # VUNa % 0(w@4 1 @ H JP 0z  0P 0Jl 0T 0^ 0hh 0r 0|B 0 0D 1u 0dIU >B) BDC1 AMtU* D3v~,v 0@} A D?< BG{ AO 0D D/ BJHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ PDIDUUӀH$tttttt3|x c:\office\wpwin\template\opinion.wpt((*2$ !        0  ((3/Q$ !   d 2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d d$$$$7Border 1ddT&C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d##  ((   YYY FILED(XAugust5,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  %%%%'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ("$    Ty  <<= 8C____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d dTC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . #       7rXXdXXd7  #\RA'\#` ` $X#ӛR')&A1-j|`  `@R YVETTEMICHELPORTERCAIRA  )   ) Plaintiff/Appellant,  )   ) AppealNo.v.   ) 01A019709CH00508   ) 01A019801CH00055RONALDSTEPHENCAIRA  ) MontgomeryChancery   ) No.9577275 Defendant/Appellee.  )  COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEAPPEALFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTFORMONTGOMERYCOUNTYATCLARKSVILLE,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLECAROLA.CATALANO,CHANCELLOR  #XGREGORYD.SMITHOnePublicSquare,Suite321Clarksville,Tennessee37040 ATTORNEYFORTHEPLAINTIFF/APPELLANT##XMARKA.RASSASSuite104,GlennBuildingClarksville,Tennessee37040##X ATTORNEYFORTHEDEFENDANT/APPELLEE#  AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED  WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE  # OPINION    #ThiscaseisbeforeusonappealfromthetrialcourtsdecreeofdivorceandgrantofchildcustodyandsupporttotheAppellee,RonaldStevenCaira.Inbringingthisappeal,Appellantraisestwoissuesforconsideration.&` ` Z$X& 8 1.WhetherthetrialcourterredinfailingtoawardprimarycustodyoftheminorchildrenofthismarriagewithDefendant/Appellee. 8 2.Whetherthetrialcourtmadeanequitablepropertydistributionofthedebts,assetsandretirementproceedsofthismarriage.  Sincethiscasewastriedwithoutajury,wepresumethetrialcourttobecorrectinitsfactualfindingsunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthem.Tenn.R.App.P.13(d)Bothpartiesrecognizeintheirbriefsthatwidediscretionisaccordedthetrialcourtregardingdivorceandcustodymatters.See Whitakerv.Whitaker, 957S.W.2d834,83637(Tenn.Ct.App.1997)permapp.denied1997,cert.denied,118S.Ct.1316,140L.Ed.2d480(Mar23,1998).Weareunpersuadedthattherecordbelowpreponderatesagainstthechancellorsfindingswithregardtocustodyandpropertydistribution. Withregardtothechildcustodyissue,Appellantmakesmuchofthetrialcourtscommentsregardingherfitnessasamother.Thetruebenchmarkforawardingchildcustodyisthecomparativefitnessofthepartiesinviewofthecriteriasetoutinourstatecode,Tenn.CodeAnn.Ϝ366106(1996).Seegenerally Gaskillv.Gaskill ,936S.W.2d626,631(Tenn.Ct.App.1996).TherecordbelowandthebriefsbeforethiscourtcontainnoshowingthatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninfindingtheFathermorefitaparentthantheMother.AppellantalsoarguesthatsincetherecordcontainsevidenceofanaffaironthepartoftheMother,thatthechancellorperforceusedthisfactasthesolereasonforawardingcustodytoMr.Caira.Thereisnofindingintherecorddeterminingthemothertobeunfitbecauseofthisoranyotherreason.Thecourtsimplystates, 8 3.ThateventhoughthePlaintiffwasthebookkeeperofthefamily,showingdisciplineinfinancialmatters,thiswasoffsetbylackofdisciplineinherpersonallife,andtheCourtbelievesthattheemotionalstabilityoftheDefendantisbetterormoreeventhanthatofthePlaintiff,andthattheDefendantshouldbeawardedcustodyoftheminorchildren,subjecttothepreviousvisitationagreementinsofaraspossible.WefinditinterestingthatAppellantmakesnoargumentthatthisfindingisagainstthepreponderanceoftheevidenceoramountstoabuseofdiscretion.Withoutsuchashowing,thiscourtmustaffirmtheactionsofthelowercourt. Asfortheissueregardingdistributionofmaritalproperty,itiswellsettledinthisjurisdictionthattrialcourtshavewidediscretionindividingmaritalproperty.Seee.g. Wadev.Wade, 897S.W.2d702,715(Tenn.Ct.App.1994).AppellantallegesinherbriefthatwhilethetrialcourtassessedMr.Cairasincomeat$25,380,histaxreturnsshowedanincomeplusorminus$72,000.AppellantattemptstoshowabuseofdiscretionbyshowingthatMr.Caira'staxformsindicatereimbursementsforexpensesϜincurred.WhatAppellantfailstoshowisapreponderanceoftheevidenceϜagainstthefindingofthetrialjudge.Appelleerepliescorrectly:"Thecourtspecificallystatedthatallproofrelativetotheparties'income,property,retirementplansanddebtswasconsidered,andtheawardtoMrs.Cairareflectedthis."Beforethiscourtmaydelveintoaredistributionofthemaritalestate,aclearshowingmustbemadebytheappellantofsomeabuseofdiscretionatthetriallevel.Otherwise,theofficeoftheappealusurpsthetrialcourt'ssuperioropportunitytoweighfactualissueswithappellatesecondguessing. Inhisreplybrief,Appelleeraisesonlyoneissue,towit,whetherthetrialcourterredinorderingadownwarddeviationinchildsupportfrom32%to22%.Thetrialdivorcedecreebelowreadsinpertinentpart,8 6.ThatbecauseofthetimethatthePlaintiffspendswiththeminorchildren,thereshouldbeadeviationfromtheChildSupportGuidelinesrequiringthePlaintifftopayaschildsupporttotheDefendant,thesumof22%ofhernetincome. ThisdeviationisinkeepingwiththeplainmeaningofTenn.Comp.R.&Regsr.124024.04(2)(b)1994.WhensuchanorderfallswellwithinthecontemplationoftheChildSupportGuidelines,wecanfindnoabuseofthediscretionofthetrialcourtinthisaward. Forthereasonsandundertheauthoritiescitedabove,weaffirmthetrialcourtinallrespectsandremandthiscaseforfurtherproceedingsnotinconsistentwiththisopinion.Costsofthisappealaretaxedequallyagainsttheparties.               _____________________________   WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE̜CONCUR:__________________________________BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGE__________________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE