WPC GRE S8HS8T1q[{beT<fF_ń>@_h1oIQHA5BIƒTDT88h$apQG<-Ȗ[ڔ|RM1%"c;@4W,40lU,}p¼`_o uh6QZ^1ԩۙ?jv%p&i;Yp yf6Mz'Hٯt 0y]7 Ge4 wmDLr5s1/9;Neً0A4/:?->nr EXf]L9x?^kWo")7i+!B7ٱHM 'orY=xr@s+&Zu yq2nl'8l/Λ|8gb#\ %% ^ + 07 UN w 4 z%  q  m UN   s99NEb 0     B 0 D3 D- 0K ASb 0{ 0D Ac\\IB01S02\CLERKJAC,,,,0܊\/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularlk.01s02 C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xU(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- -(|G2t$ !.8dd8         0   d(|3?$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8XXdd8  @ u^INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#u^ #Ԉ #   SEPTEMBER16,2003Session F XX #XX#CYNTHIAFAYEDAVISv.TERRYREGGIEDAVISXX  ? @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforGibsonCounty  9 @@No.15926GeorgeR.Ellis,Chancellor  # @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200202998_COA_ԄR3CVFiledOctober28,_2003_   AV) ` dE<]` A ^      XXXXThiscaseinvolvesanappealfromthetrialcourtsfinaldecreeofabsolutedivorceprovidingfor V  divisionofmaritalproperty,alimonyaward,andawardofattorneysfees.Weaffirminpart,reverse ? inpart,andremand#XXX X##XXo#XX XXXX. (x #XXX XX##XX9#XX Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmedinpart; J Reversedinpart;andRemanded  4   #X#XX.DavidR.Farmer,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichW.FrankCrawford,_P.J._,_W.S._,  andAlanE._Highers_,J.,joined.  JohnVanDenBosch,Jr.,Jackson,Tennessee,fortheappellant,TerryReggieDavis. r JeffreyA.Smith,Trenton,Tennessee,fortheappellee,CynthiaFayeDavis. D  OPINION #XX#XX f #XX #XX XXXX    Appellee,CynthiaFayeDavis(Ms.Davis),andAppellant,TerryReggieDavis(Mr.  9  Davis),marriedonSeptember24,1993.OnMay2,2002,Ms.Davisfiledfordivorcealleging !"! groundsofinappropriatemaritalconductandadultery.Inthecomplaint,Ms.Davisprayedfora " " divisionofmaritalproperty,alimonyinfuturo,andattorneysfees.Mr.Davisansweredthe ## divorcecomplaintandcounterfiledfordivorcealleginggroundsofadulteryandirreconcilable $$ differences.Mr.Davisaskedthecourtforanabsolutedivorcealongwithcostsandattorneys v% % fees.Inadditiontotheanswerandcountercomplaint,Mr.Davisfiledastatementofhisincome _&!& andexpenses.Subsequently,Ms.Davisfiledastatementofthecontestedandstipulatedissues H'"' andassets.Shealsofiledanaffidavitofherincomeandexpenses. 1(#(   OnSeptember24,2002,thecasewasheardbeforethetrialcourt.OnNovember15, *S%* 2002,thetrialcourtentereditsfinaldecreegrantingMs.Davisanabsolutedivorce.Thetrial *<&+ courtawardedMs.Davisthehouseinwhichthepartieslivedalongwithitscontents.Thecourt +%', alsoawardedMs.Davisthe 2001Chevrolet_Silverado_,subjecttoherrenegotiationofthedebt ,(- with[the]BankofDyerand onehalfoftheDefendantsretirementwiththeStateof -(.V Tennesseeearnedduringthecourseofmarriage.ThecourtfurtherorderedMr.Davistopay  alimonyinfuturointheamountof$850.00permonthandMs.Davisattorneysfeesforthe  proceedings.    Followingthefinaldivorcedecree,Mr.Davisfiledanoticeofappeal.Intheabsenceof T atranscript,therecordcontainsastatementoftheevidence,asamended.Inthesestatements, =  thepartiesstipulatedthatMs.DaviswastotallydisabledandthatMr.Davishadno technical & v interestinthemaritalhomebeforethemarriage.  _   IssuesPresented  1     0  Mr.DavisappealsandraisesthefollowingissuesforreviewbythisCourt: (#(#   1.0 ` Whetherthetrialcourterredinthedivisionofmaritalproperty. ` (#` (#   2.8 ` WhetherthetrialcourterredingrantingMs.DavisonehalfofMr. X  DavisretirementwiththeStateofTennesseeearnedduringthe A courseofthemarriage.*z` x` x   3.8 ` Whetherthetrialcourterredinitsawardofalimonyinfuturoto L Ms.Davis.5` x` x   4.8 ` WhetherthetrialcourterredinawardingattorneysfeestoMs.  Davis.` x` x   Ms.DavisraisesthefollowingadditionalissueforreviewbythisCourt: r 8  1.8`   WhetherMs.Davisshouldbeawardedattorneysfeesforthis D appeal.-}` x` x   0 @  StandardofReview O  y  Ourreviewofatrialcourtsconclusionsonissuesoflawisdenovo,withnopresumption !"  ofcorrectness._Kendrick_Ԁv._Shoemake_,90S.W.3d566,569(Tenn.2002).Ourreviewofatrial " ! courtsfindingonissuesoffactisdenovoupontherecord,accompaniedbyapresumptionof #" correctnessunlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Tenn.R.App.P.13(d);_Kendrick_,90 $# S.W.3dat569.Wherethetrialcourtmakesnospecificfindingsoffactonamatter,wemust v% $ reviewtherecordtodeterminewherethepreponderanceoftheevidenceliesandaccordno _&!% presumptionofcorrectnesstotheconclusionofthecourtbelow._Kendrick_,90S.W.3dat569. H'"&   DistributionofMartialProperty  +%'+     Mr.DavisarguesthatthetrialcourterredbyawardingMs.Davisagrosslyunfair  distributionofproperty.Specifically,Mr.Davisarguesthatthetrialcourterredinits  distributionofthemaritalhomeanditscontents.Intheamendedstatementoftheproceedings, k Mr.DavisstipulatedthathehadnotechnicalinterestinthehouseasMs.Davishadbroughtthe T homeintothemarriage.Additionally,Mr.Davisstipulatedtotheawardofthehomescontents =  toMs.Davis.Therefore,theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsawardof & v thehouseanditscontentstoMs.Davis.  _   Mr.DavisalsoarguesthatthetrialcourterredinawardingMs.Davisthe2001Chevrolet  1  _Siverado_.Ms.Davissstatementofincomeandexpenses,which,accordingtotheamended    statementoftheproceedings,hasbeenmadeanexhibit,indicatesthatthisvehiclehasavalueof   $10,000andadebtof$27,000.Furthermore,Mr.Davisstatement,likewiseshowntobean   exhibit,indicatessurrenderofthevehicleinbankruptcy.ThefinaldivorcedecreeawardedMs.   Davisthe 2001Chevrolet_Silverado_,subjecttoherrenegotiationofthedebtwith[the]Bankof n  Dyer.Wefindnoerrorinthetrialcourtsawardofthe2001Chevrolet_Silverado_ԀtoMs.Davis. W  й   RetirementAward )y      Mr.DavisnextcontendsthatitwaserrorforthetrialcourttoawardMs.Davisonehalf L ofhisretirementwiththeStateofTennesseeearnedduringthemarriage.Maritalproperty 5 includes thevalueofvestedand_unvested_Ԁpension,vestedand_unvested_Ԁstockoptionrights,  retirementorotherfringebenefitrightsrelatingtoemploymentthataccruedduringtheperiodof  themarriage.Tenn.CodeAnn.364121(b)(1)(B)(2001)(emphasisadded).However,there  wasnoprayerforanawardofonehalfofMr.DavisretirementcontainedinMs.Davis  complaintnordidshelisttheenumeratedcategoryofdivisionofretirementasacontestedissue r inherstatementofthecontestedandstipulatedissuesfiledwiththetrialcourt.Further,thereis [ noevidenceintherecordtoindicatetheworth,increase,andamountearnedduringthemarriage. D Therefore,thisCourthasnochoicebuttoreversethetrialcourtsawardofonehalfofMr. -} DavisretirementwiththeStateofTennesseeearnedduringthemarriage. f    AlimonyAward   8     ThetrialcourtawardedMs.Davisalimonyinfuturointheamountof$850.00amonth. " ! Mr.Daviscontendsitwaserrortomakesuchanawardwhenthecourtdidnotconsiderallthe #" enumeratedfactorscontainedinTenn.CodeAnn.365101(d)(1)(2001).Mr.Davis $# specificallyallegesthatthetrialcourtfailedtomakeproperinquiryintotheextentofMs.Davis v% $ disabilityandhereffortsforrehabilitation.However,Mr.Davisisprecludedfromcontending _&!% theextentofMs.Davissdisabilityashestipulatedtothefactthatsheisdisabledinthe H'"& statementofevidence.Determinationsofalimonyarefactuallydrivenand [_a]s_Ԁageneral 1(#' matter,wearedisinclinedtoalteratrialcourtsdecisionunlessitisnotsupportedbythe )j$( evidenceoriscontrarytothepublicpolicyembodiedintheapplicablestatutes.Brownv. *S%) Brown,913S.W.2d163,169(Tenn.Ct.App.1994)(citingWilliamsv.Williams,236_S.W._Ԁ938, *<&* 940(Tenn.1922);_Gilliam_Ԁv._Gilliam_,776S.W.2d81,86(Tenn.Ct.App.1988)).Upon +%'+ reviewingtherecord,theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsawardof  alimonyinfuturointheamountof$850.00amonthtoMs.Davis.Accordingly,weaffirmthe  trialcourtsawardofalimony.     AttorneysFees T      Mr.Davisnextcontendsthatitwaserrorforthetrialcourttoawardattorneysfeesto ' w Ms.Davis.InTennessee,attorneysfeespaidtothewife,whosuccessfullyprosecutesadivorce  ` case,aretreated aspartoftheexpensesincidenttothecauseandallowedasalimony.Rileyv.  I Riley,9Tenn.App.643,644(Tenn.Ct.App.1929)(citingWinslowv.Winslow,182_S.W._Ԁ241,  2  243(Tenn.1916));seealsoConnorsv.Connors,594S.W.2d672,675(Tenn.1980).Upon    reviewoftherecord,webelievethatitestablishesaproperbasisforanawardofreasonable   attorneysfees.However,thefinaldivorcedecreedoesnotstatethespecificamounttobe   awarded.Therefore,thiscauseisremandedtothetrialcourtforadeterminationoftheproper   amountofattorneysfeestobeawarded. o    Ms.DavishasalsoaskedthisCourtforanawardofattorneysfeesincurredonthis A appeal.Itisclearthat,ifproper,courtshavetheauthoritytoawardadditionalattorneysfees *z incurredonappeal._Seaton_Ԁv._Seaton_,516S.W.2d91,93(Tenn.1974).Therecordestablishesa c properbasisforanawardtoMs.Davisofherreasonableattorneysfeesincurredonappeal. L Thomasv.Thomas,No.E199900563_COA_ԄR2CV,2000WL276886,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App. 5 March15,2000)(noperm.app.filed).Weremandtothetrialcourtforadeterminationofthe  amountofreasonableattorneysfeesincurredonappeal.     Conclusion     0  Weaffirmthetrialcourtsawardofthemaritalhome,itscontents,andthe 2001\(#(# Chevrolet_Silverado_,subjecttoherrenegotiationofthedebtwith[the]BankofDyer,toMs. E Davis.WereversethetrialcourtsawardofonehalfofMr.DavissretirementwiththeStateof .~ Tennesseeearnedduringthecourseofthemarriage.Weaffirmthetrialcourtsawardof g attorneysfeestoMs.Davisandremandforadeterminationbythetrialcourtoftheproper  P awardamount.Wealsoremandtothetrialcourtforadeterminationoftheproperamountof  9 attorneysfeesincurredonthisappeal.Costsofthisappealaretaxedtotheappellant,Terry !"  ReggieDavis,andhissurety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.#XXX X # " !    `     h     ___________________________________ _&!%    `     h     DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE H'"&