ÿWPCÊ ™l€;¶j Œ ||/=ž•Qܶˆh¿W«^„Êš"*?ÏI0Š*ÔCŸ ÿïÌGÅÙ ³á”hÀ¸±µ•@‚X«KÄÛœ”gjPDÔ" ~#xµ-Üõ†Lü§È9ì‚|èߊåFßñ÷øø‡*‹'Msoø½ Æ%-” îî ’›ñªÎï8\CsÑvs¹ˆëŒV@DÙ–ÂÞO9»AYuçDu¥<#EfÞþô—ÉŠúB6ZX¿ÈíB…:u¦]]kÔe•ò9GÚÕk\©Ü²¯ø‹²Þ! ¯šci6ÍU9œ´@í¸†¦›Æ9rè½7ÑÕ´!6áDwäCŤëÍWÙ­ÚJ é\_  u±¢¤×Á‘6þÖߣvÁ:#jDå/Õb2=$–]«e×ÌÔ¨+UøŠý²«ki23ÊÖN§êg›ðŠvØØŸ<Ñ*›p þ·þ-ô@ëž2o£*1Ô´EËX¬®cþvJ¥Þp]ˆc$_#~g­k¿“jHÖƒ *½:çheÆ [pÀ+̬®Þ®o51ÉÂNs… .Üþ ŒØ*­2íãÌ#YÅx5Ï„š UNI %— 0³U<Pw@Œ4Ìàï AQ÷ 0÷H 0D?Uƒ(Ø U: (: U:b b b b b b b b b b b b b b Bœ ƹ 0D 0Dà 0D D/KK Bz D3—˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(‹7ÿ$¡¡Ò°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€ü†XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€Xd|XXXÔ-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman %&U'î(Ó€)Ó€*U+Ó€,Ó€8;n~<$3|x; !" %Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ(§(3!½$¤¤Ý ƒ7ÿ!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€Ì„XXdðdð7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€X´)XXXÔÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó KÝ ƒ !½$ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€X´5XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€It€is€also€important€to€note€that€Husband€also€worked€various€jobs€toÐ ° Ðsupport€his€family€while€pursuing€his€education€except€for€a€few€years€when€he€wasÏin€medical€school. Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X¸KXXXÔÔ€g+XX¸KÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¸KXg+ÔÐ  ÐÌò òDecember€9,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôèü ôXX¸KÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X¸KXXXÔÔ€g+XX¸KÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¸KXg+ÔÐ  ÐÌò òDecember€7,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôèü ôXX¸KÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ7ÿ!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€ÌÌXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€X´5XXXÔÝ  ÝÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ÌÌXXdðXXdð7Ññ8ññ,ñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` ttx$,°ð Õrßñ,ññ8ññ;ññ8ñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` ttx$,°ð Õrßñ8ññ;ññ;ñßt€ (>.*jx%ˆÿ` `€€@E°` ttx$Q°[ Ôtßñ;ñà@Ì Ì ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@éé!®àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONˆÌà ` àà ¸ à€€€€______________________________________________ÌÌò òDENNIS€T.€CROUSE,€ó óÐ ° ÐÌà ` àAppellant,ÌÌVs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àC.A.€No.€02A01„9712„CV„00312Ð ²  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àShelby€Law€No.€151303Ìò òCHARLANE€ALLEN€CROUSE,€ó óÐ ²  ÐÌà ` àAppellee.Ì____________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@H H ®àFROM€THE€SHELBY€COUNTY€CIRCUIT€COURTˆÌà@- - ®àTHE€HONORABLE€KAY€S.€ROBILIO,€JUDGEˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ôô ®àRichard€F.€Vaughn€of€Memphis€ˆÌà@>>(®àFor€AppellantˆÌÌà@P P ®àDaniel€Loyd€Taylor,€John€N.€Bean€of€MemphisˆÌà@rr(®àFor€AppelleeˆÌÌÌÌÌà@£ £ ®àò òòòAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIED€AND€REMANDEDó óóóˆÐ ´$  ÐÌà@'®àOpinion€filed:€ˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òà È àW.€FRANK€CRAWFORDó ó,Ð ´1-- Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.Ð ¶2.. ÐÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEÌÌñ%ñF.€LLOYD€ñ%ñTATUM,€SENIOR€JUDGEó óñ&ñÐ Ä955 ÐÌÐ Æ;77× Ðñ&ññ'ññ'ññ(ñÓÓñ(ññ'ñ›à ` àThis€dispute€concerns€an€award€of€alimony€and€attorneyððs€fees.€€Appellant,ÏDennis€T.€Crouse€(Husband),€appeals€from€the€trial€courtððs€order€granting€alimonyÐ ° Ðòòò òin€futuroó óóó€and€attorneyððs€fees€to€Appellee,€œCharlane›€Allen€Crouse€(Wife).Ð ° Ðà ` àThe€parties€married€on€August€21,€1971€in€Lewis€County,€New€York.€€AÏdaughter€was€born€of€this€marriage€in€1972,€but€she€is€no€longer€a€minor€and€doesÏnot€reside€with€either€party.€€After€the€marriage,€Husband€and€Wife€first€lived€inÏNew€York€where€they€both€worked€in€a€bowling€pin€factory.€€Due€to€HusbandððsÏsubsequent€military€career,€the€parties€moved€to€San€Antonio,€Texas€in€1973€andÏthen€to€Houston,€Texas.€€Upon€completing€his€military€career,€Husband€obtained€aÏBachelor€of€Science€degree€from€the€University€of€Houston€while€Wife€worked€as€aÏclerk€in€a€fabric€store.€€The€parties€then€moved€to€Galveston,€Texas€to€enableÏHusband€to€attend€medical€school.€€While€Husband€attended€medical€school,€WifeÏworked€as€a€part„time€clerk€in€a€grocery€store€and€as€a€part„time€secretary€in€theÏpathology€department€at€the€university,€eventually€quitting€the€job€at€the€groceryÏstore€in€order€to€work€full€time€in€the€pathology€department.€€After€HusbandÏobtained€his€medical€degree€in€1982€and€completed€his€residency€in€1985,€the€partiesÏmoved€from€Galveston€to€Birmingham,€Alabama€to€allow€Husband€to€participate€inÏa€fellowship€program.€€At€this€time,€Wife€worked€as€an€administrative€secretary€inÏaddition€to€providing€sewing€services€from€the€partiesðð€home.€€Wife€stopped€workingÏoutside€of€the€home€in€1989€in€order€to€pursue€her€sewing€business.€€In€1993,€theÏparties€moved€to€Memphis,€Tennessee€to€enable€Husband€to€take€a€position€at€theÏUniversity€of€Tennessee.׃ ×Ý ƒ##ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Ð ´.** Ðà ` àOn€February€13,€1996,€Husband€filed€a€complaint€for€divorce€allegingÏirreconcilable€differences€and€inappropriate€marital€conduct€on€the€part€of€Wife.€ÏWife€filed€an€answer€admitting€irreconcilable€differences€while€denying€guilt€ofÐ ´400 Ðinappropriate€marital€conduct,€and€filed€a€counter„complaint€alleging€inappropriateÏmarital€conduct€on€Husbandððs€part.€€On€March€24,€1997,€the€trial€court€entered€aÏdecree€granting€absolute€divorce€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€36„4„129€which€incorporatedÏthe€partiesðð€stipulated€property€settlement€while€reserving€the€issues€of€spousalÏsupport€and€attorneyððs€fees.€€On€November€17,€1997,€the€trial€court€entered€a€finalÏdecree€of€divorce€awarding€Wife€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€in€the€amount€of€$3,800.00€perÐ °  Ðmonth€for€forty„eight€months,€and€thereafter€in€the€amount€of€$2,900.00€per€month.€ÏThe€trial€court€also€ordered€Husband€to€pay€Wifeððs€attorneyððs€fees€and€litigationÏexpenses€in€the€amount€of€$8,750.00.€€Husband€subsequently€brought€this€appeal.Ìà ` àOn€appeal,€Husband€presents€the€following€issues€for€our€review:Ìñ'ññ)ñÓÓñ)ññ'ñà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(1)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€WifeÏalimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€rather€than€rehabilitative€alimony.д¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(2)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€WifeððsÏattorneyððs€fees€and€litigation€expenses€in€the€amount€ofÏœ$8,750.00.ñ'ññ(ññ'ñÓÓñ'ññ(ñ›œñ'ññ'ññ*ñÐ ¸ ¤¸ ¤ Ðñ*ñ›ñ'ñÌñ'ññ+ñÓÓñ+ññ'ñà ` àSince€the€trial€court€heard€this€case€sitting€without€a€jury,€we€review€the€caseÐ ¶ Ðòòò òde€novoó óóó€upon€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact€byÐ ¶! Ðthe€trial€court.€€Unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€these€findings,€we€mustÏaffirm,€absent€error€of€law.€€T.R.A.P.€13(d).à p à€Ð º% !! ÐÓ  Óò òAlimonyÐ º' ## Ðó óÓ  Óà ` àHusband€asserts€that€the€trial€court€should€have€granted€Wife€rehabilitativeÐ ¾)%% Ðalimony€rather€than€granting€her€alimony€òòò òin€futuroó óóó.€€Husband€contends€that€this€isÐ ¾+'' Ða€classic€case€for€an€award€of€rehabilitative€alimony€in€that€Wife€is€in€her€mid„forties,Ïin€good€health,€had€the€opportunity€during€the€marriage€to€pursue€further€educationÏand€training,€is€currently€pursuing€a€degree€in€special€education,€and€that€heÏsupported€Wifeððs€decision€to€pursue€her€degree€and€does€not€object€to€payingÏrehabilitative€alimony€until€she€secures€her€masterððs€degree.€€He€further€asserts€thatÏrehabilitative€alimony€is€proper€in€that€fault€was€not€a€factor€in€the€divorce,€theÏparties€did€not€enjoy€a€lavish€lifestyle,€Wife€received€an€adequate€amount€in€theÐ Â955 Ðagreed€division€of€property,€and€that€it€is€uncertain€what€her€needs€will€be€once€sheÏcompletes€her€education.Ìà ` àOn€the€other€hand,€Wife€asserts€that€the€grant€of€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€wasÐ ° Ðwarranted€by€the€circumstances€and€that€the€award€was€fair€and€equitable.€€SheÏcontends€that€she€contributed€to€her€family€by€working€outside€the€home€in€severalÏpositions€in€addition€to€caring€for€their€daughter€and€the€household€which€in€turnÏallowed€Husband€to€pursue€his€educational€endeavors.€€Furthermore,€Wife€assertsÏthat€she€is€not€capable€of€rehabilitation€given€her€age€and€lack€of€experience,€and€thatÏthe€award€of€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€will€allow€her€to€more€closely€approach€her€formerÐ ´ Ðeconomic€position€she€enjoyed€while€married.€€Finally,€Wife€contends€that€HusbandÏhas€the€ability€to€pay€the€amount€ordered€by€the€trial€court€and€that€her€needs€alsoÏsupport€the€amount€awarded.Ìà ` àIn€Tennessee,€there€is€a€preference€for€rehabilitative€alimony.€€ò òòòAaron€v.€Aaronóóó ó,Ð ¸ Ð909€S.W.2d€408,€410€(Tenn.€1995).€€Our€Supreme€Court,€in€discussing€rehabilitativeÏalimony,€stated€in€ò òòòSelf€v.€Selfó óóó,€861€S.W.2d€360€(Tenn.€1993):Ð ¼  ÐÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àœà  à[T.C.A.›€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)]€reflects€an€obviousÏlegislative€policy€that,€if€possible,€the€dependency€of€oneÏex„spouse€on€the€other€be€eliminated€and€both€parties€beÏrelieved€of€the€impediments€incident€to€the€dissolvedÏmarriage,€and€that€an€ex„spouse€be€adjudged€permanentlyÏdependent€upon€the€other€only€when€the€court€grantingÏthe€divorce€finds€that€economic€rehabilitation€is€notÏfeasible€and€long„term€support€is€necessary.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓòòò òId.ó óóó€at€361.€€ð ðHowever,€rehabilitative€alimony€is€offered€as€an€alternative€to€alimonyÐ À+'' Ðò òòòin€futuroóóó ó,€not€as€a€replacement.ðð€€ò òòòFord€v.€Fordóóó ó,€952€S.W.2d€824,€827€(Tenn.€App.Ð Ä-)) Ð1996).€€T.C.A.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)€still€permits€the€courts€to€award€long„term€supportÏif€it€appears€that€rehabilitation€is€not€feasible.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€ð ðAccordingly,€our€domesticÐ È1-- Ðrelations€laws€governing€the€payment€of€alimony€still€acknowledges€that:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àððThe€husband,€having€entered€one€of€the€strongest€mostÏfundamental€relationship€known€to€the€law,€mustÏcontinue€to€bear€its€financial€burden€where€he€canÏreasonably€do€so€and€where€it€is€necessary€in€order€toÏprevent€a€relatively€greater€hardship€to€the€wife.ððððÐÌ955¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓòòò òId.ó óóó€(quoting€H.€Clark,€òòò òThe€Law€of€Domestic€Relations€in€the€United€Statesó óóó€ðð€17.5€atÐ Ì955 Ð255€(2nd€ed.€1987)).€€€Ìà ` àT.C.A.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1)€(Supp.€1998)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(d)(1)€It€is€the€intent€of€the€general€assembly€that€aÏspouse€who€is€economically€disadvantaged,€relative€to€theÏother€spouse,€be€rehabilitated€whenever€possible€by€theÏgranting€of€an€order€for€payment€of€rehabilitative,Ïtemporary€support€and€maintenance.€€Where€there€is€suchÏrelative€economic€disadvantage€and€rehabilitation€is€notÏfeasible€in€consideration€of€all€relevant€factors,€includingÏthose€set€out€in€this€subsection,€then€the€court€may€grantÏan€order€for€payment€of€support€and€maintenance€on€aÏlong„term€basis€or€until€the€death€or€remarriage€of€theÏrecipient€except€as€otherwise€provided€in€subdivisionÏ(a)(3).€€Rehabilitative€support€and€maintenance€is€aÏseparate€class€of€spousal€support€as€distinguished€fromÏalimony€in€solido€and€periodic€alimony.€€In€determiningÏwhether€the€granting€of€an€order€for€payment€of€supportÏand€maintenance€to€a€party€is€appropriate,€and€inÏdetermining€the€nature,€amount,€length€of€term,€andÏmanner€of€payment,€the€court€shall€consider€all€relevantÏfactors,€including:Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(A)€The€relative€earning€capacity,€obligations,€needs,€andÏfinancial€resources€of€each€party,€including€income€fromÏpension,€profit€sharing€or€retirement€plans€and€all€otherÏsources;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(B)€The€relative€education€and€training€of€each€party,€theÏability€and€opportunity€of€each€party€to€secure€suchÏeducation€and€training,€and€the€necessity€of€a€party€toÏsecure€further€education€and€training€to€improve€suchÏpartyððs€earning€capacity€to€a€reasonable€level;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(C)€The€duration€of€the€marriage;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(D)€The€age€and€mental€condition€of€each€party;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(E)€The€physical€condition€of€each€party,€including,€butÏnot€limited€to,€physical€disability€or€incapacity€due€to€aÏchronic€debilitating€disease;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(F)€The€extent€to€which€it€would€be€undesirable€for€aÏparty€to€seek€employment€outside€the€home€because€suchÏparty€will€be€custodian€of€a€minor€child€of€the€marriage;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(G)€The€separate€assets€of€each€party,€both€real€andÏpersonal,€tangible€and€intangible;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(H)€The€provisions€made€with€regard€to€the€maritalÏproperty€as€defined€in€ðð€36„4„121;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(I)€The€standard€of€living€of€the€parties€established€duringÐ °955 Ðthe€marriage;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(J)€The€extent€to€which€each€party€has€made€such€tangibleÏand€intangible€contributions€to€the€marriage€as€monetaryÏand€homemaker€contributions,€and€tangible€andÏintangible€contributions€by€a€party€to€the€education,Ïtraining€or€increased€earning€power€of€the€other€party;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(K)€The€relative€fault€of€the€parties€in€cases€where€theÏcourt,€in€its€discretion,€deems€it€appropriate€to€do€so;€andÐ ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(L)€Such€other€factors,€including€the€tax€consequences€toÏeach€party,€as€are€necessary€to€consider€the€equitiesÏbetween€the€parties.ÓÓÐ ¸ ¤¸ ¤ Ðà ` àð ðThe€amount€of€alimony€to€be€allowed€in€any€case€is€a€matter€for€theÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€court€in€view€of€the€particular€circumstances.ðð€€ò òòòIngram€v.Ð ° ÐIngramóóó ó,€721€S.W.2d€262,€264€(Tenn.€App.€1986).€€In€determining€the€amount€ofÐ ´ Ðalimony,€ð ðthe€real€need€of€the€spouse€seeking€the€support€is€the€single€mostÏimportant€factor.€€In€addition€to€the€need€of€the€disadvantaged€spouse,€the€courtsÏmost€often€consider€the€ability€of€the€obligor€spouse€to€provide€support.ðð€€ò òòòCranfordÐ ¸ Ðv.€Cranfordóóó ó,€772€S.W.2d€48,€50€(Tenn.€App.€1989)€(citations€omitted).€€ð ðWhileÐ ¼  Ðalimony€is€not€intended€to€provide€a€former€spouse€with€relative€financial€ease,€weÏstress€that€alimony€should€be€awarded€in€such€a€way€that€the€spouses€approachÏequity.ðð€€ò òòòAaronóóó ó,€909€S.W.2d€at€411.Ð À%!! Ðà ` àHusband€is€in€his€mid„forties€and€is€a€neonatologist€at€the€University€ofÏTennessee€and€the€University€of€Tennessee€Medical€Group.€€Husbandððs€income€hasÏcontinued€to€increase€over€the€years.€€In€1996,€Husband€had€an€income€ofÏapproximately€$150,000.00.€€Wife€is€also€in€her€mid„forties.€€After€the€divorce,€WifeÏbegan€to€pursue€a€Bachelor€of€Arts€degree€with€a€major€in€special€education.€€WifeÏcurrently€is€a€full„time€student€and€works€part€time€as€a€student€assistant€at€fiveÏdollars€per€hour.€€It€is€estimated€that€it€will€take€Wife€three€to€four€years€to€completeÏher€Bachelor€of€Arts€degree.€€Wife€then€plans€to€pursue€her€masterððs€degree€in€specialÏeducation€which€she€estimates€will€take€approximately€one€and€one„half€to€two€yearsÏto€complete.€€Wife€will€be€fifty€or€fifty„one€years€of€age€upon€completion€of€herÐ Ä955 Ðeducation.Ìà ` àAt€the€time€of€the€divorce,€the€parties€agreed€on€a€division€of€property.€€As€aÏresult€of€such€agreement,€each€party€received€assets€from€various€retirement€andÏinvestment€plans.€€Furthermore,€Wife€received€the€marital€residence€which,€at€theÏtime€of€the€divorce,€was€worth€approximately€$200,000.00€but€which€had€onlyÏapproximately€$30,000.00€in€equity.€€The€total€amount€each€party€received€as€aÏresult€of€the€property€division€was€approximately€$114,000.00.Ìà ` àDuring€the€proceedings€below,€each€party€filed€a€Rule€14€Affidavit€of€IncomeÏand€Expenses.€€Husbandððs€affidavit€reveals€a€gross€monthly€salary€of€$10,869.92€andÏa€net€monthly€salary€of€$7,713.67.€€Husbandððs€affidavit€further€reveals€that€hisÏmonthly€expenses€for€the€support€of€Wife€to€be€$4,091.03€which,€according€to€hisÏaffidavit,€results€in€a€monthly€deficit€of€$487.75€after€payment€of€his€monthlyÏexpenses.€€At€the€time€of€the€hearing€below,€Husband€admitted€that€a€change€inÏcircumstances€reduced€his€monthly€deficit€to€approximately€$36.00.€€On€the€otherÏhand,€Wifeððs€affidavit€reveals€a€gross€monthly€income€of€$530.00€and€a€net€monthlyÏincome€of€$397.10.€€Her€affidavit€further€reveals€$5,164.47€in€total€monthlyÏœexpenseññsññ›€which€results€in€a€monthly€deficit€of€$4,767.37.Ìà ` àWith€the€foregoing,€we€believe€the€trial€court€correctly€determined€that€WifeÏshould€be€awarded€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó.€€Wife€is€economically€disadvantaged€toÐ °($$ ÐHusband.€€The€record€reveals€that€Husband€has€a€greater€earning€capacity,€superiorÏeducation,€and€better€job€training€than€Wife.€€Wife€also€substantially€contributed€toÏher€family€and€household€in€œñña€ññnumber›€of€ways€which€allowed€Husband€to€œachieveññ€ññññ€ññññ›ññññtññhis›Ïsuperior€education€and€earning€capacity.€€Ìà ` àThis€was€a€twenty„six€year€marriage.€€During€this€marriage,€Husband€has€beenÏbuilding€a€career€outside€the€home€while€Wife€has,€for€the€most€part,€worked€withinÏthe€home€such€that€she€has€no€college€degree€and€only€limited€outside„workÏexperience.€€Wife€worked€several€different€jobs,€provided€for€the€care€of€the€partiesððÐ ´844 Ðdaughter€and€household,€and€freely€moved€several€times€to€support€and€contributeÏto€Husbandððs€career.€€Wife€sacrificed€her€career€to€follow€Husband€around€theÏcountry€in€furtherance€of€his€career.€€Ìà ` àThe€record€further€reveals€that€Wife€is€in€need€of€some€support€and€thatÏHusband€has€the€ability€to€pay.€€It€is€unlikely€that€Wife€will€ever€be€able€to€approachÏthe€level€of€income€which€Husband€is€able€to€enjoy.€€Thus,€given€due€considerationÏto€all€relevant€factors,€we€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€alimony€ò òòòin€futuro€ó óóóawarded€toÐ °  ÐWife€is€necessary€for€her€to€continue€to€maintain€a€reasonable€standard€of€livingÏwhich€is€at€least€somewhat€comparable€to€that€which€she€experienced€before€theÏdivorce.Ìà ` àWe€therefore€believe€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€$3,800.00€per€month€as€alimonyÏò òòòin€futuro€ó óóófor€forty„eight€months€to€be€correct€given€that€this€will€allow€Wife€toÐ ´ Ðcomplete€her€education.€€However,€we€find€the€grant€of€$2,900.00€per€month€asÏalimony€òòò òin€futuroó óóó€to€be€excessive.€€While€we€agree€that€granting€alimony€òòò òin€futuroÐ ¸ Ðó óóórather€than€rehabilitative€alimony€was€correct€in€this€aspect,€we€believe€that€WifeððsÐ ¼  Ðaward€should€be€reduced€to€$2,000.00€per€month€as€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€and€that€suchÐ ¼"  Ðbe€terminated€upon€the€death€or€remarriage€of€Wife.€€As€this€Court€stated€inÏò òòòLancaster€v.€Lancasteróóó ó,€671€S.W.2d€501€(Tenn.€App.€1981):Ð À&"" ÐÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àAlimony€is€not€and€never€has€been€intended€by€ourÏlegislature€to€be€punitive.€€Nor€do€we€believe€it€wasÏintended€simply€as€an€award€œññofññññforññññññ€ññññ›€virtue.€€It€is€not€designedÏto€serve€as€an€annuity€for€the€wife;€or€as€Professor€ClarkÏhas€stated€ð ð[t]he€purpose€of€alimony€is€to€care€for€theÏwifeððs€needs€after€divorce,€not€to€provide€her€with€a€life„¼time€profit„sharing€plan.ððÐ ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌò òòòÓÓId.óóó ó€at€503€(citations€omitted).€€Ð Ä0,, Ðà ` àIt€is€unclear€what€Wifeððs€needs€will€be€upon€completion€of€her€education.€ÏHowever,€it€is€clear€that€Wife€will€then€have€the€means€and€ability€to€support€herselfÏsomewhat.€€Furthermore,€Wife€received€a€reasonable€amount€of€assets€from€theÏproperty€division.€€Given€the€foregoing,€the€award€of€$2,900.00€per€month€asÐ È844 Ðalimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€was€excessive€and€should€be€reduced€to€$2,000.00€per€month€asÐ ° Ðalimony€òòò òin€futuroó óóó.€€This€amount€should€be€more€than€sufficient€to€support€her€onceÐ ´ Ðshe€has€acquired€her€education.€€However,€this€is€not€to€say€that€circumstances€mayÏchange€which€may€warrant€an€increase€or€decrease€in€the€amount€of€alimony.ÌÓ  Óò òAttorneyððs€Feesó óÐ ¸  ÐÓ  Óà ` àAs€previously€mentioned,€Husband€also€contests€the€trial€courtððs€orderÏgranting€$8,750.00€in€attorneyððs€fees€and€litigation€expenses€to€Wife.€€HusbandÏcontends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€fees€considering€the€assets€WifeÏreceived€in€the€division€of€property€and€the€lack€of€liquid€assets€on€his€part.€€To€theÏcontrary,€Wife€asserts€that€she€does€not€have€the€resources€to€pay€attorneyððs€feesÏgiven€the€fact€that€she€is€a€full„time€student€and€is€only€working€part€time.€ÏFurthermore,€Wife€contends€that€the€parties€received€the€same€amount€in€theÏproperty€division€and€that€the€majority€of€her€portion€was€in€the€form€of€equity€inÏthe€marital€residence€and€retirement€accounts.€€Wife€also€requests€that€this€CourtÏaward€her€attorneyððs€fees€incurred€on€this€appeal.Ìà ` àAttorney€fee€awards€are€treated€as€alimony.€€ò òòòGilliam€v.€Gilliamóóó ó,€776€S.W.2dÐ ¼"  Ð81,€86€(Tenn.€App.€1988).€€In€determining€whether€to€award€attorneyððs€fees,€the€trialÏcourt€should€again€consider€the€relevant€factors€in€T.C.A.€ðð€36„5„101(d)(1).€Ïò òòòHoughland€v.€Houghlandóóó ó,€844€S.W.2d€619,€623€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Where€the€wifeÐ À($$ Ðdemonstrates€that€she€is€financially€unable€to€afford€counsel,€and€where€the€husbandÏhas€the€ability€to€pay,€the€court€may€properly€order€the€husband€to€pay€the€wifeððsÏattorneyððs€fees.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó;€ò òòòHarwell€v.€Harwellóóó ó,€612€S.W.2d€182,€185€(Tenn.€App.€1980).€Ð Ä.** ÐFurthermore,€the€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€is€within€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trialÏcourt,€and€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€award,€it€will€not€beÏdisturbed€on€appeal.€€ò òòòLyon€v.€Lyonóóó ó,€765€S.W.2d€759,€762„63€(Tenn.€App.€1988).Ð È400 Ðà ` àIn€the€case€sub€judice,€we€cannot€say€that€the€evidence€preponderates€againstÏthe€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Wife€is€entitled€to€attorneyððs€fees.€€Given€the€status€ofÐ Ì844 Ðthe€parties€and€the€division€of€property,€Wife€does€not€have€the€resources€or€abilityÏto€pay€these€fees€while€Husband€readily€has€the€ability€to€pay€such.€€However,€weÏbelieve€that€the€respective€parties€should€bear€the€expense€of€their€own€attorneyððs€feesÏfor€this€appeal.Ìà ` àAccordingly,€the€decree€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€to€reduce€the€award€ofÏ$2,900.00€per€month€as€alimony€ò òòòin€futuroóóó ó€to€an€award€of€$2,000.00€per€month€asÐ °  Ðalimony€ò òòòin€futuro€ó óóóto€terminate€upon€the€death€or€remarriage€of€Wife.€€As€modified,Ð ´  Ðthe€decree€is€affirmed,€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€such€further€proceedings€as€areÏnecessary.€€Costs€of€the€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant.€€€ÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€Ð ¸ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÐ º  ÐÌò òCONCUR:Ð ¼  ÐÌÌó ó____________________________________Ð Â Ðò òDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEó óÐ Â ÐÌ____________________________________Ìœò òññF.€ññññññllññññññLLOYD€ññññLLOYD›€R.›€ññTATUM,›€SENIOR€JUDGEó óœÔ†ÿÿÔÔ†ÿÿÔÔ  ÔÔ  Ôñ'ñ