WPC; 24 ZB}HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSXN\  PXPa1AutoList1$ a2AutoList1/ a3AutoList1: 2 faa4AutoList1E a5AutoList1P   a6AutoList1[   a7AutoList1f  2R }  !a8AutoList1q a1Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a) $ a2Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a) / a3Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a) : 2  -  a4Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a) E a5Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a) P a6Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)[ a7Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)f 2  0J a8Paragraph1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)q  X0Í ÍX0Í ÍҫXN\  PXP(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularXXZ2PXP%2A`ArialTTXXN\  PXP(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX[9 x(hH  Z(Times New Roman 2PP,cAZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularX[\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularT\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular[9 x(hH  Z(Times New Roman [\  P P(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularXN\  P XP(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX[\  P P(9 Z6Times New Roman Regularu\  P P(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular[\  P P(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularXN\  PXP(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularXXN9 xX(hH  Z(Times New Roman XXN\  PXP(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX[\  PP(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular[\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular[9 x(hH  Z(Times New Roman [\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular[9 x(hH  Z(Times New Roman [\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular[9 x(hH  Z(Times New Roman [\  PP(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular2193|xUS A'Legal  e    @--@#XZ2PXP#   #XN\  PXP##[9 x#dddd 1 dddd 1  %!` 8` 8US#2PP# FILED#XZ2PXP# November 17, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk % #[\  PP#IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE   ,X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:t@B PATRICIA J. COTTRELL, JUDGE CONCUR: KOCH, J. CAIN, J. #[\  P P#@@#XN\  P XP#  #[\  P P#v)#u\  P P# OPINION   X #[\  P P# This case involves an appeal from the trial courts decision in a divorce which ended a six year marriage. Mr. Russell Todd Cole ( Husband) appeals the courts order of joint custody of the couples two sons, ages five and two, with Ms. Katherine Drescher Cole ( Wife) as primary custodian. He also appeals the court assigning to him the mileage charges on the leased van and the credit card debt, the award of some property to Wife that he claims as his separate property, and the courts failure to assign him the 1998 tax deduction for one of the children. For the following reasons, we affirm.  X .I.  X  An appellate courts review of the trial courts findings regarding child custody, allocation of debt and division of property are de novo on the record, accompanied by a presumption of correctness. See Nichols v. Nichols, 792 S.W. 2d 713, 716 (Tenn. 1990);  Mondelli v. Howard, 780 S.W.2d 769, 77273 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). Accordingly, unless the evidence preponderates against the trial courts findings, we must affirm. See Tenn. R. App. P. 13(d). II. Husband first appeals the trial courts order of joint custody of the children to the parties, with Wife as the primary custodian. Testimony before the court indicated that each parent had various minor shortcomings, but that each parent loved the children and had provided care and nurturing for them. Husband had also cared for and played with Wifes oldest son from a previous marriage. The trial court found that while Husband had been involved with the children all along, he became much more involved after Wife announced her intent to divorce him. The court awarded joint custody with Wife as the primary custodian. Husband has visitation with the children on alternate weekends, every Wednesday evening, alternating holidays, and from June 1 through August 15 every summer. Wife has similar weekend, weeknight and holiday visitation with the children while they are with their father in the summer. The court must consider many factors X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: