ÿWPC€ aáˆ}¾g4R¿´ì)Ü {ËïZåéŽÓ˜ö¤ÝH¯5dܘý0ÅÀ%'û6—¬/*píà׸ò9YÍžk9‡¶i›ÊÛcõ»LT£ÃÙ,i¹ôUfYWÅ$Ÿoòû@«¨XÙêeåÏJ¡ @€ž=òÖtaÂ[Œù¡ ²­çÌB½5’£žz 9YnIg€‚ìãäœÐޤPeŽöN¾m}t7i$Øáùêù¼ãÌFç’ý™Ò½ 2Ú#ªRuWö/'šÇ{hËäÙ(ëÉD¹u¯Ùç=µZm” 7G‰·ß3]óo§ž%6\\uiÛÎTýRé£é‹±­âý‘/ôÏ‘ÁVhí]rkò¸›Xxª“øŽ>Ýïí ,ð8Xz¶ ¾„lÞ‡€¹V™‚Ęå[öÞèé‚> ËEëWuÎ3i â¸2ï­õùª’˜o˜ˆ«i"žäª: á1)Ëë#Ð\OÎ><º%ü«ç³R :U;µëKî.ÊB]¤¥ëRŠÚíï5ò.}s{ ­(å×Ój?èÜ•\чäpùwg}ë+8¶'ªrË¢fK)n`nà:ñ$»3¢EœW¿±.#«Ì˜ë!J„Æ9çq«•P‰~%­™`| g›µ˜)ðAbb#Á\ % UN# 0ˆq UNù 0DG ^ ‹ z— Ò wã 4ç 6û 1Æ@ÆÆÌÆ’XNZ m\\Essssssssssssssssssssssssbuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 0ë}}}} Bhh 0¤… D3) D-\ 0K‰‰ ASÔÆ' 0¤í 0D‘ A«Õ˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó/u+L  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt˜L-(,آ̜¢ ,Ý ƒRŸ¯$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÔÌò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Section€36„5„101(e)(1)€of€the€Tennessee€Code€states€the€following:€Ð ° ÐÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÌIn€making€its€determination€concerning€the€amount€of€support€of€any€minor€childÐ @ Ðor€children€of€the€parties,€the€court€shall€apply€as€a€rebuttable€presumption€the€childÐ X Ðsupport€guidelines€as€provided€in€this€subsection.€€If€the€court€finds€that€evidenceÐ Ð  Ðis€sufficient€to€rebut€this€presumption,€the€court€shall€make€a€written€finding€thatÐ ˜è Ðthe€application€of€the€child€support€guidelines€would€be€unjust€or€inappropriate€inÐ ` ° Ðthat€particular€case,€in€order€to€provide€for€the€best€interest€of€the€child(ren)€or€theÐ ( x Ðequity€between€the€parties.€€Findings€that€the€application€of€the€guidelines€wouldÐ ð @ Ðbe€unjust€or€inappropriate€shall€state€the€amount€of€support€that€would€have€beenÐ ¸   Ðordered€under€the€child€support€guidelines€and€a€justification€for€the€variance€fromÐ € Ð  Ðthe€guidelines.Ð H ˜  ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓòòTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101óó(e)(1)€(Supp.€2000).à@ìì*ìà3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ- ù-(|G2Ÿ¯$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€´4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÔÌò»»Ô d(|3Á$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€´4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Á$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€´4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€´4»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼´4»»»ÔÑ8€¾XXdð»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îâ×´4ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼´4»îîâ× #ԈРÜ, ÐÓ  ÓMARCH€20,€2001€SessionÐ X ÐÔ‡X¾X»¼´4ÔÌò òÔ#†¼´4»XX¾ñ#ÔSUZANNE€W.€GIBSONòòóó,€ET€AL€v.€JAMES€E.€Ô_ÔPROKELLÔ_ÔòòóóÔ‡X¾X»¼´4Ôó óÐ  ` ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ  h Ðà@@øøìàNo.€103880„1;€The€Honorable€Walter€L.€Evans,€ChancellorÐ  X ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<×` AßÐ Ø(  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„01236„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€August€15,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ×'  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X¨hXXX¾ÔThis€is€the€fourth€time€that€an€aspect€of€this€domestic€dispute€has€come€before€this€court.€€BothÐ ¶ Ðparties€appeal€and€raise€numerous€issues,€primarily€involving€child€support€and€visitation.€€For€theÐ ¢ò Ðreasons€set€forth€herein,€we€affirm€in€part,€reverse€in€part,€and€remand€to€the€court€below€for€furtherÐ ŽÞ Ðproceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€à À àà  àà p àà È àà  àà x àà Ð àÔ#†X¾XXX¨hê#ÔÔ#†¼´4»XX¾#ÔÔ‡X¾X»¼´4ÔÐ zÊ ÐÓÞÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€Part,Ð V¦ ÐReversed€in€Part€and€Remandedó óÐ F– ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼´4»àX¾8#ÔÔ‡X¾X.¼´4ÔAlan€E.€Highers,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€Ô_ÔP.j.Ô_Ô,€Ô_ÔW.S.Ô_ÔÐ &v ÐóójoinedÔ#†¼´4»XX¾U#ÔÔ‡X¾X»¼´4Ôòò,óó€and€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó€concurred€separately,.Ð f ÐÌScott€B.€Ô_ÔPeatrossÔ_Ô,€Memphis,€for€AppellantÐ öF ÐÌFelix€H.€Bean,€III,€Memphis,€for€AppelleeÐ Ö& ÐÓ&ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼´4»XX¾Z #ÔÔ‡X¾X»¼´4ÔÐ ¶  ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼´4»XX¾© #ÔÔ‡X¾X»¼´4ÔÓ  Óò òÔ‡X¨hXXX¾Ôà@ÿÿìàFacts€and€Procedural€HistoryˆÐ –"æ! ÐòòÌó óóóà  àThis€is€a€domestic€dispute€primarily€involving€visitation€and€child€support€issues.€€TheÐ n$¾# Ðparties,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€and€Mrs.€Gibson,€were€divorced€in€Pittsburgh,€Pennsylvania,€in€September€1993.€Ð Z%ª $ ÐMr.€Ralph€Gibson€is€Mrs.€Gibsonððs€current€husband,€and€he€is€also€an€attorney€who€has€at€variousÐ F&–!% Ðtimes€represented€Mrs.€Gibson€in€this€case.€€Mrs.€Gibson€now€resides€in€Memphis,€Tennessee,€andÐ 2'‚"& ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€still€resides€in€Pennsylvania.€€The€parties€have€one€minor€child,€Ô_ÔMaxfieldÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€(Max),Ð (n#' Ðwho€was€born€on€March€31,€1987.€€Primary€custody€of€Max€was€given€to€Mrs.€Gibson€by€theÐ  )Z$( ÐPennsylvania€court,€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€was€granted€liberal€visitation.€€On€January€4,€1994,€a€ConsentÐ ö)F%) ÐOrder€of€Court€was€entered€in€Pennsylvania.€€The€court,€among€other€things,€set€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€childÐ â*2&* Ðsupport€at€$250.00€and€required€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€pay€all€transportation€expenses€for€visitation.€Ð Î+'+ Ðâ âÐ º, (,ý Ðà  àOn€February€16,€1994,€in€Tennessee,€the€chancery€court€entered€an€Order€Limiting€TelephoneÐ ° Ðâ âCalls€and€Suspending€Visitation€Rights€Pending€a€Hearing€on€this€Matter.€€On€November€22,€1994,Ð œì Ðafter€a€jurisdictional€issue€was€decided,€the€Tennessee€chancery€court€order€was€reinstated€pendingÐ ˆØ Ða€full€evidentiary€hearing€on€Petitionerððs€Petition€for€Respondent€to€Show€Cause€Why€His€VisitationÐ tÄ ÐRights€Should€Not€Be€Revoked.€Ð `° ÐÌà  àOn€June€7,€1995,€the€chancery€court€entered€an€agreed€order,€which€set€out€liberal€visitationÐ 8 ˆ Ðbetween€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€and€Max.€€On€November€29,€1995,€the€trial€court€entered€an€Order€GrantingÐ $ t ÐPetition€for€Contempt.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€was€found€to€be€in€contempt€of€the€courtððs€June€7,€1995,€orderÐ  ` Ðfor€the€following€reasons:Ð ü L  ÐÌ1)€having€inappropriate€conversations€with€Max€that€show€animosity€and€hostility€towards€Mr.€andÐ Ô$  ÐMrs.€Gibson€and€cause€Max€to€feel€insecure€about€his€home€environment€in€Memphis;€2)€discussingÐ À  Ðongoing€and€past€legal€proceedings€with€Max;€3)€harassing,€browbeating,€manipulating,€andÐ ¬ü  Ðintimidating€professionals€involved€in€the€case€to€get€them€to€intercede€on€his€behalf;€4)€refusing€toÐ ˜è  Ðfollow€the€courtððs€order€that€he€engage€in€regular,€frequent€individual€psychotherapy€and€that€heÐ „Ô  Ðcooperate€with€and€follow€all€recommendations€of€his€psychotherapist€and€Dr.€Dixon,€Maxððs€childÐ pÀ Ðpsychologist;€and€5)€relentlessly€attempting€to€get€more€visitation€than€the€courtððs€order€allows.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àOn€December€22,€1995,€the€court€entered€an€Order€Awarding€Sanctions€for€Failure€toÐ 4„ ÐComply€with€Order€Compelling€Discovery,€Granting€Interim€Increase€in€Child€Support€Pending€aÐ  p ÐFull€Hearing,€and€Accepting€Jurisdiction€Over€Child€Support€Issues.€€In€this€order,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_ÔððsÐ  \ Ðchild€support€was€increased€from€$250.00€per€month€to€$500.00€per€month.€Ð øH ÐÌà  àOn€June€6,€1996,€the€court€entered€an€Order€Setting€Permanent€Support€and€ReducingÐ Ð  ÐÔ_ÔArrearagesÔ_Ô€to€Judgment.€€Due€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€failure€to€cooperate€in€the€discovery€process,€the€trialÐ ¼  Ðcourt€found€that€permanent€child€support€should€be€set€based€on€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€1995€admitted€totalÐ ¨ø Ðrevenue€of€$102,214.82,€less€a€deduction€only€for€taxes€in€the€amount€of€$11,257.00.€€Therefore,€theÐ ”ä Ðcourt€found€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€net€income€to€be€$90,957.82€and€set€his€child€support€payments€at€21%,Ð €Ð Ðwhich€amounted€to€payments€of€$1,591.76€per€month.€€The€trial€court€made€the€$1,591.76€monthlyÐ l¼ Ðchild€support€payment€retroactive€to€March,€1995,€and€the€trial€court€also€reduced€child€supportÐ X ¨ ÐÔ_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€to€$20,879.77.€€In€making€its€decision,€the€trial€court€specifically€found€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_ÔÐ D!” Ðhad€willfully€and€deliberately€failed€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€orders€compelling€discovery€andÐ 0"€  Ðgranting€sanctions.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€non„compliance€was€evidenced€by€hisÐ #l! Ðfailure€to€file€a€correct€formal€response€to€Mrs.€Gibsonððs€first€request€for€production€of€documents,Ð $X" Ðby€his€failure€to€produce€numerous€documents€necessary€to€calculate€child€support,€and€by€his€refusalÐ ô$D # Ðto€appear€at€his€deposition.€€On€June€14,€1996,€an€Order€was€entered€requiring€supervised€visitationÐ à%0!$ Ðpending€a€full€hearing.€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àOn€August€13,€1996,€an€Order€of€Contempt€was€entered€because€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€failed€to€makeÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€June€1996€child€support€payment€timely,€and€because€he€only€paid€$500.00€of€the€July€1996Ð )à$( Ðsupport€payment€of€$1,591.74.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€was€also€sentenced€to€ten€days€in€jail,€and€a€warrant€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðissued€for€his€arrest.€€On€May€9,€1997,€a€judgment€for€child€support€arrears€was€entered€in€theÐ h+¸&* Ðamount€of€$13,845.50.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€appealed€to€this€court,€and€we€affirmed€the€trial€court€onÐ ° ÐDecember€10,€1997.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€case€sat€dormant€until€1999,€when€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€filed€a€motion€entitled€James€E.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_ÔððsÐ tÄ ÐMotion€for€Specific€Visitation,€to€Reevaluate€Temporary€Order€of€6„14„96€and€for€Reduction€inÐ `° ÐChild€Support.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€was€being€inducted€into€the€Ô_ÔEdinboroÔ_Ô€University€Athletic€Hall€of€FameÐ L œ Ðfor€college€basketball,€and€he€wanted€Max€to€attend€the€ceremony.€The€Order€on€Motion€forÐ 8 ˆ ÐVisitation€was€entered€on€April€28,€1999,€òòÔ_ÔnuncÔ_Ô€pro€Ô_ÔtuncÔ_Ôóó€to€April€21,€1999.€€The€Order€permitted€Mr.Ð $ t ÐÔ_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€have€visitation€with€Max€during€his€induction€to€the€Ô_ÔEdinboroÔ_Ô€University€Athletic€HallÐ  ` Ðof€Fame.€€The€Order€also€instructed€Mrs.€Gibson€to€render€an€accounting€of€all€monies€collectedÐ ü L  Ðfrom€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô.€€As€a€result,€Mrs.€Gibson€filed€a€statement€claiming€that€she€had€collectedÐ è 8  Ð$17,204.85€from€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô.€€After€attorneysðð€fees,€Mrs.€Gibson€claimed€a€net€recovery€ofÐ Ô$  Ð$10,357.99.€€On€June€10,€1999,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€filed€a€petition€for€contempt€due€to€the€Gibsonsðð€failureÐ À  Ðto€send€Max€to€Pennsylvania€for€the€induction€ceremony€as€ordered€by€the€court.€Ð ¬ü  ЀÌà  àOn€September€2,€1999,€the€trial€court€granted€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€visitation€with€Max€over€LaborÐ „Ô  ÐDay€weekend.€€That€same€day,€this€court€stayed€the€Labor€Day€visitation€Order.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€was€conducted€on€November€1€and€2,€1999.€€On€May€19,€2000,€the€trial€courtÐ H˜ Ðentered€its€final€order€granting€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€Motion€for€Specific€Visitation€and€to€ReevaluateÐ 4„ ÐTemporary€Order€of€6„14„96€and€for€Reduction€in€Child€Support€and€granting€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€otherÐ  p Ðequitable€relief.€€Specifically,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€1)€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Gibson€were€in€willfulÐ  \ Ðcontempt€of€court€for€failure€to€allow€Max€reasonable€visitation€with€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô;€2)€there€was€noÐ øH Ðbasis€for€the€court€to€recuse€itself;€3)€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€appearance€in€the€trial€court€on€November€1€andÐ ä4 Ð2,€1999,€and€the€fact€that€he€turned€over€certain€documents€purged€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€of€contempt;€4)€Mr.Ð Ð  ÐÔ_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€was€reduced€to€$672.50€per€month€based€on€a€$52,500.00€annual€income,Ð ¼  Ðwith€$500.00€of€each€monthly€payment€to€be€applied€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€arrears;€5)€the€child€supportÐ ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€should€be€modified;€6)€none€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€shall€accrue€interest,Ð ”ä Ðand;€7)€liberal,€unsupervised€visitation€between€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€and€Max€shall€be€reinstated,€and€Mrs.Ð €Ð ÐGibson€shall€pay€one„half€of€the€expenses€of€visitation.€€Mrs.€Gibson€filed€her€notice€of€appeal€onÐ l¼ ÐMay€24,€2000.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€Gibsons€present€the€following€issues,€as€quoted€from€their€brief,€for€our€review:Ð 0"€  ÐÌ1.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€denying€Mrs.€Gibsonððs€motion€to€deny€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€any€relief€until€Mr.Ð $X" ÐÔ_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€purges€himself€of€contempt€of€the€trial€courtððs€visitation€and€child€support€orders,€whichÐ ô$D # Ðwere€affirmed€by€this€court?òòóóÐ à%0!$ Ð2.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€failing€to€deny€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€for€modification€because€the€motionÐ Ì&"% Ðshould€have€been€filed€as€a€petition€for€modification€with€service€of€process€issued€and€served€onÐ ¸'#& ÐMrs.€Gibson€and€because€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€failed€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€could€beÐ ¤(ô#' Ðgranted?Ð )à$( Ðâ â3.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€refusing€to€recuse€itself?Ð |*Ì%) Ð4.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€refusing€to€follow€the€law€of€the€case€established€by€this€Courtððs€opinionsÐ ° Ðâ âand€orders€dated€December€10,€1997,€and€September€3,€1999,€and,€instead,€in€ruling€that€final€ordersÐ œì Ðof€the€trial€court€entered€by€the€former€Chancellor€and€affirmed€by€this€Court€were€ð ðunconscionable,ððÐ ˆØ Ðthereby€justifying€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€retroactively€modify€the€final€child€support€andÐ tÄ Ðsupervised€visitation€orders€entered€in€1996€without€finding€a€material€change€of€circumstances?€Ð `° Ð5.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€adjusting€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€current€monthly€child€support€payment€downwardÐ L œ Ðby€$500.00€per€month€as€a€downward€deviation€from€the€child€support€guidelines€necessitated,€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€trial€courtððs€opinion,€by€the€ð ðunfairðð€child€support€amount€assessed€against€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€by€theÐ $ t Ðprior€Chancellor€and€affirmed€by€this€Court?Ð  ` Ð6.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€retroactively€modifying€child€support€for€an€extensive€period€prior€to€Mr.Ð ü L  ÐÔ_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€filing€of€a€request€for€modification€and€in€refusing€to€assess€12%€per€annum€interest€on€theÐ è 8  Ðchild€support€arrears€as€required€by€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(5)?Ð Ô$  Ð7.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€modifying€a€1994€Pennsylvania€decree€which€required€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€payÐ À  Ðall€visitation€expenses?Ð ¬ü  Ð8.€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€Mr.€Gibson,€who€was€not€a€party€to€the€proceedings,€and€Mrs.Ð ˜è  ÐGibson€in€contempt€for€failing€to€allow€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€unsupervised€visitation€when,€in€fact,€the€JuneÐ „Ô  Ð14,€1996€order€required€supervised€visitation?Ð pÀ Ð9.€€Did€the€trial€court€commit€numerous€procedural€errors€(1)€by€refusing€to€allow€Mrs.€GibsonÐ \¬ Ðproper€discovery;€(2)€by€allowing€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€purported€expert€witness,€Mr.€Levy,€to€testify€despiteÐ H˜ Ðthe€fact€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€failed€to€provide€the€requested€discovery€regarding€any€expert€witnesses€heÐ 4„ Ðwould€offer€at€the€hearing€and€despite€the€fact€that€Mr.€Levy€was€incompetent€to€testify€as€toÐ  p Ðrecommendations€for€the€partiesðð€minor€child;€(3)€by€refusing€to€allow€Mrs.€Gibsonsððs€counsel€toÐ  \ Ðcross„examine€Mr.€Levy€regarding€the€fees€Mr.€Levy€was€charging€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€testify;€(4)€byÐ øH Ðadmitting€into€evidence€a€hearsay€letter€from€a€psychiatrist€without€requiring€trial€or€evidentiaryÐ ä4 Ðdeposition€testimony€from€the€psychiatrist;€and€(5)€by€refusing€to€read€and€consider€the€evidentiaryÐ Ð  Ðdeposition€of€the€court„appointed€child€psychologist,€Dr.€Stacey€Lynn€Dixon,€which€was€taken€justÐ ¼  Ðtwo€days€before€the€trial?Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€addition,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€presents€the€following€three€issues,€as€quoted€from€his€brief,€for€ourÐ €Ð Ðreview:Ð l¼ ÐÌ1.€€Is€the€natural€father€who€was€awarded€ð ðpartial€custodyðð€of€a€13„year„old€male€child€entitled€toÐ D!” Ðspecific€visitation€with€that€child?€Ð 0"€  Ð2.€€Should€the€amount€of€child€support€to€be€paid€by€a€non„resident€father€be€set€in€accordance€withÐ #l! Ðthe€Tennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€under€a€ð ðsignificant€varianceðð€test?Ð $X" Ð3.€€Did€the€Trial€Court€have€a€reasonable€basis€upon€which€to€have€sustained€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€PetitionÐ ô$D # Ðseeking€to€cite€Mrs.€Gibson€for€contempt,€as€well€as€the€Ô_ÔsuaÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔsponteÔ_Ô€finding€Attorney€Ralph€GibsonÐ à%0!$ Ð(Mrs.€Gibsonððs€husband)€was€in€contempt€of€the€orders€of€Court?Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àWe€will€address€each€issue€in€turn.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌò òòòÓ  ÓóóÌÐ h+¸&* ÐStandard€of€Reviewó óÐ ° ÐÌòòò òóóó óÓ  Óà  àWhen€a€civil€action€is€heard€by€a€trial€judge€sitting€without€a€jury,€our€review€of€the€matterÐ ˆØ Ðis€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€below.€€òòSeeÐ tÄ ÐFoster€v.€Ô_ÔBueÔ_Ôóó,€749€S.W.2d€736,€741€(Tenn.€1988);€òòTenn.€R.€App.€Póó.€13(d).€€We€may€not€reverse€theÐ `° Ðfindings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€judge€unless€they€are€contrary€to€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€Ð L œ ÐòòSee€Ô_ÔJahnÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔJahnÔ_Ôóó,€932€S.W.2d€939,€941€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€This€presumption€of€correctness,Ð 8 ˆ Ðhowever,€does€not€attach€to€the€trial€judgeððs€legal€determinations€or€the€trial€courtððs€conclusions€thatÐ $ t Ðare€based€on€undisputed€facts.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔNCNBÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔNatððlÔ_Ô€Bank€v.€Ô_ÔThrailkillÔ_Ôóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð  ` ÐApp.€1993).ò òòòà ` àà ¸ àÐ ü L  Ðà  àà ` àÌÓ  ÓóóLaw€and€AnalysisòòÐ Ô$  ÐÌó óóóÓ  Óà  àFirst,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€any€relief€due€toÐ ¬ü  Ðhis€failure€to€purge€himself€of€contempt.€€Although€the€trial€court€explicitly€purged€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€ofÐ ˜è  Ðcontempt€in€its€final€order,€Ms.€Gibson€argues€that€the€chancellor€erred€in€purging€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€ofÐ „Ô  Ðcontempt€because€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€had€not€completely€complied€with€the€courtððs€previous€orders.€€WeÐ pÀ Ðdisagree.€€The€trial€court€has€discretion€over€the€fixing€of€conditions€upon€which€the€Ô_ÔcontemnorÔ_Ô€mayÐ \¬ Ðpurge€himself.€€òòSee€Busch€v.€Bergóó,€384€N.Y.S.2d€301,€303€(N.Y.€App.€Div.€1976).€€Moreover,€ð ð[a]Ð H˜ Ðcourt€may€permit€a€person€adjudicated€in€contempt€of€its€order€to€purge€himself€or€herself€of€theÐ 4„ Ðcontempt€in€such€manner€as€it€deems€proper€and€advisable.ðð€€17€Ô_ÔC.J.S.Ô_Ô€òòContemptóó€ðð€121€(1999).€€WeÐ  p Ðfind€that€the€chancellor€did€not€abuse€his€discretion€in€purging€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€of€contempt.€€Therefore,Ð  \ Ðthis€issue€is€without€merit.òòò òÐ øH ÐÌà  àó óóóNext,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€deny€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€forÐ Ð  Ðmodification.€€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€motion€should€have€been€filed€as€a€petition€forÐ ¼  Ðmodification€with€service€of€process€issued€and€served€on€Mrs.€Gibson.€€Furthermore,€Mrs.€GibsonÐ ¨ø Ðavers€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€failed€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€could€be€granted.òòò ò€ó óóóMrs.Ð ”ä ÐGibson€has€not€provided€us€with€any€authority€that€states€that€a€Petition€for€Modification€must€beÐ „Ô Ðfiled.€€Additionally,€our€own€research€leads€us€to€no€such€conclusion.€€As€a€result,€we€find€that€theÐ pÀ Ðtrial€court€did€not€err€in€entertaining€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€for€relief.€€Ð \ ¬ ÐÌà  àMrs.€Gibson€also€claims€that€service€of€process€should€have€been€issued€and€served€on€her.€Ð 4"„  ÐWe€note€that€Mrs.€Gibson€was€provided€with€notice€on€April€15,€1999,€by€hand€delivery,€and€theÐ  #p! Ðhearing€was€not€set€until€April€21,€1999.€€The€court€of€appeals€has€stated€that:Ð  $\" ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓSince€jurisdiction€is€continuing,€notice€requirements€uponÐ ä%4!$ Ðcommencement€of€an€action€to€modify€or€enforce€the€decree€are€notÐ Ð& "% Ðso€stringent€as€those€for€a€new€action.€€All€that€is€required€is€that€theÐ ¼' #& Ðadverse€party€be€given€ð ðreasonable€notice,ðð€that€is,€ð ðsuch€as€oneÐ ¨(ø#' Ðdesirous€of€actually€informing€the€absent€party€might€reasonablyÐ ”)ä$( Ðadopt.ððòòò òÐ €*Ð%) Ðà ¸ àÐ l+¼&* ÐÓ °ÓÓ °Óó óJarvis€v.€Jarvisóó,€664€S.W.2d€694,€696€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983)€(internal€citations€omitted).€€Under€theÐ ° Ðunique€facts€of€the€instant€case,€we€find€that€Mrs.€Gibson€was€provided€with€sufficient€notice.€€WeÐ œì Ðalso€find€that€the€motion€stated€a€claim€upon€which€relief€could€be€granted.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àNext,€Mrs.€Gibson€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€recuse€itself.€€Ms.€GibsonÐ `° Ðpoints€to€several€statements€made€by€the€chancellor€and€alleges€that€the€chancellor€was€biased€orÐ L œ Ðprejudiced€against€her.€€Our€supreme€court€has€stated€that€all€litigants€are€entitled€to€the€ð ðcoldÐ 8 ˆ Ðneutrality€of€an€impartial€court.ðð€€òòDavis€v.€Liberty€Mut.€Ins.€Co.óó,€38€S.W.3d€560,€564€(Tenn.€2001).€Ð $ t ÐA€trial€before€a€biased€or€prejudiced€judge€is€a€denial€of€due€process.€€òòSee€Wilson€v.€Wilsonóó,€987Ð  ` ÐS.W.2d€555,€562€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€Judges€must€conduct€themselves€ð ðat€all€times€in€a€mannerÐ ü L  Ðthat€promotes€public€confidence€in€the€integrity€and€impartiality€of€the€judiciary.ðð€€òòTenn.€S.€Ct.€R.Ð è 8  Ð10óó,€Canon€2(A).€€Judicial€recusal€is€called€for€ð ðwhen€an€ordinary€person€in€the€judgeððs€position,Ð Ô$  Ðknowing€all€the€facts€known€to€the€judge,€would€find€a€reasonable€basis€for€questioning€the€judgeððsÐ À  Ðimpartiality.ðð€€òòDavisóó,€38€S.W.3d€at€564.€€In€the€present€case,€we€note€that€the€Motion€to€RecuseÐ ¬ü  ÐChancellor€was€filed€on€May€8,€2000,€which€was€over€six€months€after€the€trial.€€We€also€note€thatÐ ˜è  Ðrequests€for€recusal€are€left€primarily€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€court.€€òòSee€State€v.€Ô_ÔHinesÔ_Ôóó,€919Ð „Ô  ÐS.W.2d€573,€578€(Tenn.€1995).€€We€will€not€interfere€with€a€courtððs€decision€regarding€recusal€unlessÐ pÀ Ðit€is€clear€that€the€court€has€abused€its€discretion.€€òòSee€id.óó€€Under€the€unique€circumstances€of€theÐ \¬ Ðinstant€case,€we€do€not€find€that€the€refusal€of€the€chancellor€to€recuse€himself€was€an€abuse€ofÐ H˜ Ðdiscretion.€€Accordingly,€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àFifth,€Mrs.€Gibson€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€follow€the€law€of€the€caseÐ  \ Ðestablished€by€this€courtððs€orders€of€December€10,€1997,€and€September€3,€1999.€€Specifically,€Mrs.Ð øH ÐGibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€retroactively€modifying€child€support€and€supervisedÐ ä4 Ðvisitation€orders€without€finding€a€material€change€of€circumstances.òòò òÐ Ð  ÐÌÌóóVisitationòòÐ ”ä ÐÌó óóóà  àThis€court€has€stated€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€custody€and€visitation€of€minor€children€are€some€of€the€mostÐ l¼ Ðsensitive€issues€that€confront€a€trial€court€in€a€divorce€case.ðð€€òòÔ_ÔBrewsterÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔBrewsterÔ_Ôóó,€2001€WLÐ X ¨ Ð401600,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€23,€2001)€(citing€òòÔ_ÔGaskillÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔGaskillÔ_Ôóó,€936€S.W.2d€626,€630€(Tenn.Ð D!” ÐCt.€App.€1996)).€€Moreover,€ð ð[Ô_Ôc]ustodyÔ_Ô€and€visitation€arrangements€are€within€the€discretion€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðtrial€court,€but€trial€courts€must€base€decisions€on€the€proof€and€appropriate€law€and€principles.€€InÐ #l! Ðreviewing€custody€and€visitation€cases€the€welfare€of€the€children€involved€is€paramount,€and€theÐ $X" Ðright€of€a€non„custodial€parent€to€reasonable€visitation€is€clearly€favored.ðð€€òòId.óó€(internal€citationsÐ ô$D # Ðomitted).€€Tennessee€courts€have€recognized€that€non„custodial€parents€have€a€fundamental€right€toÐ à%0!$ Ðvisitation.€€òòSeeóó€òòTenn.€Code€Annóó.€ðð€36„6„301€(Supp.€2000).€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€Mrs.€Gibson€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€because€it€did€not€find€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðð ðmaterial€change€of€circumstancesðð€to€justify€changing€supervised€visitation.€€At€this€juncture,€weÐ )à$( Ðmust€now€address€another€issue€raised€by€Mrs.€Gibson.€€Specifically,€Mrs.€Gibson€alleges€that€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðtrial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€read€and€consider€the€evidentiary€deposition€of€the€court€appointedÐ h+¸&* Ðchild€psychologist,€Dr.€Stacey€Lynn€Dixon.€€Mrs.€Gibson€cites€the€case€of€òòÔ_ÔIntegonÔ_Ô€Indemnity€Corp.Ð ° Ðv.€Ô_ÔFlanaganÔ_Ôóó,€No.€02A01„9812„CH„00382,€1999€WL€492656,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jul.€13,€1999).€Ð œì ÐIn€òòÔ_ÔIntegonÔ_Ôóó,€this€court€addressed€a€similar€issue€arising€out€of€a€case€from€Chancellor€Evansðð€court.€Ð ˆØ ÐCounsel€for€Ô_ÔIntegonÔ_Ô€was€trying€to€show€a€videotape€deposition€when€the€following€exchange€tookÐ tÄ Ðplace:òòò òÐ `° ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °Óó óóóÔ_ÔINTEGONÔ_ÔððS€COUNSEL:€€Is€the€court€telling€me€I€canððt€show€that€[aÐ 8 ˆ Ðvideotape€of€Charlotte€Ô_ÔTackashÔ_Ôððs€deposition],€put€that€into€evidence?€Ð $ t ÐThe€problem€that€Iððm€concerned€about€is€that€I€have€evidence€that€IððmÐ  ` Ðnot€being€allowed€to€put€in.Ð ü L  ÐÌTHE€COURT:€Well,€what€evidence€are€you€not€being€allowed€to€putÐ Ô$  Ðin?Ð À  ÐÌÔ_ÔINTEGONÔ_ÔððS€COUNSEL:€Videotaped€deposition€testimony.Ð ˜è  ÐÌTHE€COURT:€But€youððve€summarized€the€strong€points€of€herÐ pÀ Ðtestimony.€€Is€there€anything€which€you€have€not€stated€that€her€videoÐ \¬ Ðwould€disclose€that€you€wish€to€advise€the€court?Ð H˜ ÐÌÔ_ÔINTEGONÔ_ÔððS€COUNSEL:€If€Your€Honor€please,€itððs€a€70„pageÐ  p Ðdeposition€and€I€canððt€ð!ð€with€all€due€respect€to€the€Court,€itððs€unfairÐ  \ Ðto€ask€me€to€stipulate€to€all€of€the€things€that€might€be€pertinent€inÐ øH Ðthat€deposition.Ð ä4 ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓòòId.óó€at€*2.ò ò€€ó óThe€trial€court€did€not€allow€Ô_ÔIntegonÔ_Ôððs€counsel€to€enter€the€deposition€into€evidence.€€òòSeeÐ ¼  Ðidóó.€€Instead,€the€trial€court€required€counsel€to€summarize€the€strong€points€of€the€deposition.€€òòSeeÐ ¬ü Ðid.óó€€The€trial€court€then€proceeded€to€rule€upon€the€merits€of€the€case€based€upon€counselsðð€openingÐ ˜è Ðstatements.€€òòSee€id.óó€€We€concluded€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€fully€considering€the€depositionÐ „Ô Ðtestimony.€€òòSee€id.óóÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€the€following€exchange€occurred€during€the€trial€regarding€Dr.€DixonððsÐ H!˜ Ðdeposition:Ð 4"„  ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓTHE€COURT:€Well,€Iððm€sure€Mr.€Ô_ÔPeatrossÔ_Ô€is€going€to€call€theÐ  $\" ÐCourtððs€attention€to€whatever€portion€of€the€deposition,€I€assume,€thatÐ ø$H # Ðyou€are€relying€on€rather€that€just€submitting€the€entire€deposition.Ð ä%4!$ ÐÌÔ_ÔMRÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔPEATROSSÔ_Ô:€Well,€we€took€this€on€Saturday,€and€every€questionÐ ¼' #& ÐI€asked€is€relevant€to€the€proceedings€here.€.€.€.Ð ¨(ø#' ÐÌTHE€COURT:€Is€there€something€that€you€want€to€call€the€CourtððsÐ €*Ð%) Ðattention€to€particularly€in€the€deposition?Ð l+¼&* ЇÔ_ÔMRÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔPEATROSSÔ_Ô:€No,€Your€Honor.€€The€entire€thing€ð!ð€my€entireÐ ° Ðdirect€examination€is€very€important.€€Ð œì ÐÌÓ  Ó.€.€.Ð tÄ ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ_ÔMRÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔPEATROSSÔ_Ô:€Did€Your€Honor€read€the€deposition€of€Dr.Ð L œ ÐÔ_ÔDicksonÔ_Ô€[sic]?Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌTHE€COURT:€No,€but€the€Court€feels€that€Dr.€Ô_ÔDicksonÔ_Ôððs€[sic]Ð  ` Ðreport€is€not€relevant€at€this€point.€.€.€.Ð ü L  ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓ  ÓWhile€it€is€true€that€Dr.€Dixon€had€not€seen€any€of€the€parties€in€over€three€years,€we€disagree€withÐ Ô$  Ðthe€trial€courtððs€statement€that€there€is€no€relevant€information€in€Dr.€Dixonððs€deposition.€€Just€as€weÐ À  Ðheld€in€òòÔ_ÔIntegonÔ_Ôóó,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€not€reading€and€considering€the€evidentiaryÐ ¬ü  Ðdeposition.€€Therefore,€we€remand€to€the€trial€court€with€instructions€to€consider€Dr.€DixonððsÐ ˜è  Ðdeposition€in€its€entirety€before€ruling€on€the€visitation€issue.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àÌò òChild€Supportà ¸ àÐ H˜ Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àó óMrs.€Gibson€also€asserts€that€the€trial€court€committed€several€errors€regarding€child€support.€Ð  p ÐFirst,€Mrs.€Gibson€avers€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€retroactively€modifying€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô.€Ð  \ ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€filed€his€Motion€for€Reduction€in€Child€Support€on€April€15,€1999.€€In€its€final€order,Ð øH Ðthe€trial€court€retroactively€modified€arrears€from€May,€1998,€through€April,€1999.€€Section€36„5„Ð ä4 Ð101(a)(5)€of€the€Tennessee€Code€states,€in€relevant€part,€that€ð ð[child€support€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô]€shall€not€beÐ Ð  Ðsubject€to€modification€as€to€any€time€period€or€any€amounts€due€prior€to€the€date€that€an€action€forÐ ¼  Ðmodification€is€filed€and€notice€of€the€action€has€been€mailed€to€the€last€known€address€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðopposing€parties.ðð€€òòTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101€(óóa)(5)€(Supp.€2000)òò;€óóòòsee€also€Ô_ÔRutledgeÔ_Ô€v.€Barrettóó,Ð ”ä Ð802€S.W.2d€604,€606„07€(Tenn.€1991).€€Accordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€retroactivelyÐ €Ð Ðmodifying€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€prior€to€the€date€of€April€15,€1999,€which€was€theÐ l¼ Ðdate€his€Motion€for€Reduction€in€Child€Support€was€filed.€€Therefore,€on€remand,€the€trial€court€mustÐ X ¨ Ðreinstate€the€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€that€accrued€under€prior€orders€through€April€15,€1999.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àMrs.€Gibson€also€avers€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€declaring€that€all€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_ÔððsÐ #l! ÐÔ_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€are€to€be€paid€without€the€accrual€of€interest.€€Section€36„5„101(a)(5)€of€the€TennesseeÐ $X" ÐCode€states€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôi]fÔ_Ô€the€full€amount€of€child€support€is€not€paid€by€the€date€upon€which€the€orderedÐ ô$D # Ðsupport€is€due,€the€unpaid€amount€is€in€arrears€and€shall€become€a€judgment€for€the€unpaid€amountsÐ à%0!$ Ðand€ò òshall€accrue€interest€from€the€date€of€the€arrearage€at€the€rate€of€twelve€percent€(12%)€perÐ Ì&"% Ðannumó ó.ðð€€òòTenn.€Code€Annóó.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(5)€(Supp.€2000)€(emphasis€added).€€The€aforementionedÐ ¼' #& Ðlanguage€is€clearly€mandatory€regarding€the€accrual€of€interest€on€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô.€€Therefore,€we€find€thatÐ ¬(ü#' Ðthe€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€Ô_ÔarrearagesÔ_Ô€shall€be€paid€without€the€accrual€ofÐ ˜)è$( Ðinterest.Ð „*Ô%) ÐÐ p+À&* Ðà  àNext,€Mrs.€Gibson€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€adjusting€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€current€monthlyÐ ° Ðchild€support€payment€downward€by€$500.00€per€month€as€a€downward€deviation€from€the€childÐ œì Ðsupport€guidelines.€€ò òó óWhile€the€trial€court's€findings€of€facts€are€entitled€to€a€presumption€ofÐ ˆØ Ðcorrectness€on€appeal,€the€lower€court's€discretion€is€tempered€by€the€child€support€guidelines.€òòSeeóóÐ tÄ ÐòòTenn.€R.€App.€P.óó€13(d);€òòJones€v.€Jonesóó,€930€S.W.2d€541,€544€(Tenn.€1996).€€Statutory€authorityÐ `° Ðprovides€for€a€Ô_ÔrebuttableÔ_Ô€presumption€that€the€percentage€amount€of€child€support€provided€in€theÐ L œ Ðguidelines€is€the€correct€amount.€€However,€"[the€guidelines]€are€subject€to€deviation€upward€orÐ 8 ˆ Ðdownward€when€the€assumptions€on€which€they€are€based€do€not€pertain€to€a€particular€situation."€Ð $ t ÐòòNash€v.€Ô_ÔMulleÔ_Ôóó,€846€S.W.2d€803,€805€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€order€to€justify€a€downward€deviation€fromÐ  ` Ðthis€amount,€the€trial€court€must€make€written€findings€outlining€the€reasons€for€this€deviation.€Ð ü L  ÐThese€reasons€must€show€that€the€deviation€is€either€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child;€that€the€childÐ è 8  Ðsupport€guidelines€would€be€unjust€or€inappropriate;€or€needed€to€maintain€equity€between€theÐ Ô$  Ðparties.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€discussed€when€such€deviations€were€acceptable€in€òòJonesóó:Ð À  ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓWhile€ðð€36-5-101(e)(1)€does€authorize€deviation€in€order€to€ensureÐ ˜è  Ðequity€between€the€parties,€and€while€downward€deviation€is€clearlyÐ „Ô  Ðnot€prohibited,€the€trial€court's€authority€to€do€so€must€be€consideredÐ pÀ Ðin€light€of€the€provisions€dealing€with€such€deviation--RuleÐ \¬ Ð1240-2-4-.04(2)€and€(4).€Although€not€exclusive,€those€subsectionsÐ H˜ Ðprovide€for€downward€deviation€in€three€instances:€(1)€where€Ô_ÔDHSÔ_ÔÐ 4„ Ðhas€taken€custody€of€the€child(Ô_ÔrenÔ_Ô)€pursuant€to€a€neglect,€dependency,Ð  p Ðor€abuse€action;€(2)€where€the€child(Ô_ÔrenÔ_Ô)€spend€more€visitation€timeÐ  \ Ðwith€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€than€is€assumed€by€the€guidelines;€and€(3)€in€casesÐ øH Ðin€which€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€is€subjected€to€an€"extreme€economic€hardship,"Ð ä4 Ðsuch€as€where€other€children€living€with€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€haveÐ Ð  Ðextraordinary€needs.€€Therefore,€the€guidelines€expressly€provide€forÐ ¼  Ðdownward€deviation€where€the€Ô_ÔobligeeÔ_Ô€has€utterly€ceased€to€care€forÐ ¨ø Ðthe€child(Ô_ÔrenÔ_Ô);€where€the€Ô_ÔobligeeÔ_Ô€clearly€has€a€lower€level€of€childÐ ”ä Ðcare€expense€than€that€assumed€in€the€guidelines;€and€where€theÐ €Ð ÐÔ_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€is€saddled€with€an€"extreme€economic€hardship."€€AlthoughÐ l¼ Ðthe€rule€does€not€purport€to€set€forth€an€exhaustive€list€of€instances€inÐ ° Ðwhich€downward€deviation€is€allowed,€these€specific€instancesÐ œì Ðnevertheless€are€a€powerful€indication€as€to€the€types€of€situations€inÐ ˆØ Ðwhich€it€is€contemplated€under€the€guidelines.Ð tÄ ÐÌÓ °QÓÓ °CÓòòJonesóó,€930€S.W.2d€at€545.Ð L œ ÐÌIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€trial€court€based€its€deviation€from€statutory€guidelines€on€ð ðthe€inequity€thatÐ $ t Ðexists€in€the€amount€of€child€support€that€was€unfairly€imposed€upon€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€initially.ðð€€We€mustÐ  ` Ðremember€that€child€support€determinations€are€made€with€the€childððs€best€interests€in€mind,€not€theÐ ü L  Ðbest€interests€of€the€custodial€and€non„custodial€parents.€€Upon€review,€we€find€no€adequateÐ è 8  Ðjustification€for€the€downward€deviation€in€the€amount€of€$500.00€per€month.€€Therefore,€the€trialÐ Ô$  Ðcourt€is€reversed€on€this€issue.Ð À  ÐÌà  àNext,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€modifying€a€1994€Pennsylvania€decreeÐ ˜è  Ðthat€required€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€pay€all€visitation€expenses.€€The€court€below€assessed€one„half€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðvisitation€expenses€to€Mrs.€Gibson.€€We€have€addressed€this€issue€before€in€òòÔ_ÔReznicekÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔReznicekÔ_Ôóó,Ð pÀ Ð1991€WL€156407,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€There,€we€held€that€the€trial€court€must€first€considerÐ \¬ Ðevidence€of€the€partiesðð€respective€financial€resources€before€allocating€visitation€expenses.€€òòSee€id.óóÐ H˜ Ðat€*5.€€In€the€instant€case,€the€record€is€void€of€any€such€consideration€by€the€court€below.€€Therefore,Ð 4„ Ðwe€set€aside€the€allocation€as€made€and€remand€this€aspect€to€the€trial€court€to€hear€evidenceÐ  p Ðregarding€the€financial€resources€of€both€Mrs.€Gibson€and€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô.€€After€hearing€andÐ  \ Ðconsidering€the€evidence,€the€trial€court€is€directed€to€make€such€allocation,€as€in€its€opinion,€theÐ øH Ðproof€dictates.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àNext,€Mrs.€Gibson€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€held€her€and€Mr.€Gibson,€who€isÐ ¼  Ða€non„party,€in€contempt.€€The€contempt€arose€from€a€dispute€over€the€courtððs€order€that€providedÐ ¨ø ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€with€visitation€with€Max€in€Pennsylvania€in€order€to€attend€the€Ô_ÔEdinboroÔ_Ô€Athletic€HallÐ ”ä Ðof€Fame€induction€ceremony.€€Apparently,€the€Gibsons€objected€to€specific€provisions€of€the€orderÐ €Ð Ðas€drafted.€€Specifically,€the€Gibsons€alleged€that€the€order€had€three€additions€that€were€notÐ l¼ Ðauthorized€by€the€court.€€As€a€result,€the€Gibsons€did€not€send€Max€to€Pennsylvania€to€accompanyÐ X ¨ ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€the€induction€ceremony.€€We€note€that€ð ðthough€the€phraseology€of€the€decree€violatedÐ D!” Ðmay€be€Ô_ÔinartificialÔ_Ô€and€obscure,€it€does€not€excuse€the€party,€if€the€spirit€and€intent€of€the€decree€areÐ 0"€  Ðmanifest€and€free€from€doubt.ðð€€7€òòTenn.€Ô_ÔJurÔ_Ô.€òòóóContemptóó€ðð€5€(1997)€(citing€òòBlair€v.€Nelsonóó,€67€Tenn.Ð #l! Ð(8€Ô_ÔBaxtÔ_Ô.)€1€(1874)).€€Moreover,€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€authority€to€punish€for€contempt€is€inherent€in€the€office€ofÐ $X" Ðchancellor,€and€a€determination€of€the€question€whether€his€orders€have€been€disobeyed€or€his€dignityÐ ô$D # Ðinsulted€is€a€prerogative€peculiarly€personal€to€the€chancellor.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citations€omitted).€€While€thereÐ à%0!$ Ðmay€have€been€some€questions€regarding€the€minute€details€of€the€ordered€visit,€there€is€no€doubtÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€the€spirit€and€intent€of€the€decree€was€that€Max€was€to€be€sent€to€Pennsylvania€to€attend€theÐ ¸'#& Ðinduction€ceremony€with€his€father.€€Nevertheless,€the€Gibsons€disregarded€the€courtððs€ruling€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdid€not€send€Max€to€Pennsylvania.€€Upon€review€of€the€record,€we€find€that€the€chancellor€did€notÐ )à$( Ðâ âabuse€his€discretion€in€holding€Mrs.€Gibson€in€contempt,€since€the€order€was€directed€to€her€as€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðcustodial€parent.€€Mr.€Gibson€is€not€a€custodial€parent€and€is€not€a€party€to€the€proceedings.€€ThatÐ ° Ðportion€of€the€order€finding€him€in€contempt€is€reversed.€à p àà È àÐ œì Ðâ âÌà  àIn€Mrs.€Gibsonððs€final€issue,€she€asserts€that€the€trial€court€committed€numerous€proceduralÐ tÄ Ðerrors.€€First,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€refusing€to€allow€her€proper€discovery.€Ð `° ÐSpecifically,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€Mr.€Levy€to€testify€because€Mr.Ð L œ ÐÔ_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€only€stated€in€discovery€that€Mr.€Levy€would€testify€as€to€the€love€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€has€for€his€son.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐHowever,€Mr.€Levy€testified€about€a€broader€range€of€issues.€€Therefore,€Mrs.€Gibson€argues€that€Mr.Ð $ t ÐLevy€should€not€have€been€allowed€to€testify.€€We€note€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€decision€of€the€trial€court€inÐ  ` Ðdiscovery€matters€will€not€be€reversed€on€appeal€unless€a€clear€abuse€of€discretion€is€demonstrated.ðð€Ð ü L  ÐòòBenton€v.€Snyderóó,€825€S.W.2d€409,€416€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€the€instant€case,€we€find€no€abuse€ofÐ è 8  Ðdiscretion€regarding€the€chancellorððs€rulings€on€discovery€matters.€€Therefore,€the€trial€courtððsÐ Ô$  Ðdecision€to€allow€Mr.€Levy€to€testify€is€affirmed.Ð À  ÐÌà  àMrs.€Gibson€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€allow€her€counsel€to€cross„Ð ˜è  Ðexamine€Mr.€Levy€regarding€the€fees€he€was€charging€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€to€testify.€€We€find€that€this€wasÐ „Ô  Ðharmless€error€that€did€not€affect€the€result.€€Therefore,€we€are€compelled€to€affirm€the€judgmentÐ pÀ Ðbelow€on€this€basis.€€òòSee€Bass€v.€Ô_ÔBarksdaleÔ_Ôóó,€671€S.W.2d€476€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984);€òòTenn.€R.€App.Ð \¬ ÐP.€óó36(b).à ` àÐ H˜ Ðà  àà ` àÌà  à€Mrs.€Gibson€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€allowing€a€hearsay€letter€into€evidence.€Ð  p ÐWe€find€that€this€was€also€harmless€error.€€Therefore,€this€issue€is€without€merit.€€òòSee€id.óóà Ð àÐ  \ Ðà  àÌà  àNow,€we€turn€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€issues.€€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€first€issue€relates€to€visitation.€€As€weÐ ä4 Ðstated€earlier€in€this€opinion,€we€remand€this€issue€so€that€the€trial€court€may€consider€the€evidentiaryÐ Ð  Ðdeposition€of€Dr.€Dixon€before€it€reaches€a€conclusion.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àNext,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€asserts€that€the€amount€of€child€support€to€be€paid€by€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€shouldÐ ”ä Ðbe€set€in€accordance€with€the€Tennessee€Child€Support€Guidelines€under€a€significant€variance€test.ò ò€Ð €Ð Ðó óThe€trial€court€found€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€1999€income€was€$52,500.00.€€Therefore,€the€trial€court€setÐ pÀ ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€at€$672.50,€in€accordance€with€the€child€support€guidelines.€€Ð \ ¬ ÐÌà  àPrior€to€July€1,€1994,€trial€courts€could€modify€existing€child€support€awards€"only€upon€aÐ 4"„  Ðshowing€of€a€substantial€and€material€change€of€circumstances€."€€òòTenn.€Code€Ann.€óóòòóóðð€36-Ð  #p! Ð5-101(a)(1)€(1991)€(amended€1994).€The€General€Assembly€replaced€this€standard€in€1994€byÐ  $\" Ðenacting€legislation€providing€that:€Ð ø$H # ÐÌÓ °ÓÓ °ÓIn€cases€involving€child€support,€upon€application€of€either€party,€theÐ Ð& "% Ðcourt€shall€decree€an€increase€or€decrease€of€such€allowance€whenÐ ¼' #& Ðthere€is€found€to€be€a€significant€variance,€as€defined€in€the€childÐ ¨(ø#' Ðsupport€guidelines€.€.€.€between€the€guidelines€and€the€amount€ofÐ ”)ä$( Ðâ âsupport€currently€ordered€unless€the€variance€has€resulted€from€aÐ €*Ð%) Ðpreviously€court-ordered€deviation€from€the€guidelines€and€theÐ ° Ðcircumstances€which€caused€the€deviation€have€not€changed.Ð œì Ðâ âÓ °¸ÓÓ °s¸ÓÌòòTenn.€Code€Ann.€óóðð€36-5-101(a)(1)€(Supp.€1995).€Ð tÄ ÐÌIn€accordance€with€the€amended€statute,€the€Department€of€Human€Services€promulgated€a€ruleÐ L œ Ðproviding€in€part€that€"a€significant€variance€shall€be€at€least€15%€if€the€current€support€is€oneÐ 8 ˆ Ðhundred€dollars€($100.00)€or€greater€per€month€and€at€least€fifteen€dollars€($15.00)€if€the€currentÐ $ t Ðsupport€is€less€than€$100.00€per€month."€€òòTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Ô_ÔRegsÔ_Ô.€Tit.€10,€Ch.€óó1240-2-4-.02(3)Ð  ` Ð(1994).€€A€modification€must€be€made€if€the€existing€support€obligation€varies€by€fifteen€percent€orÐ ü L  Ðmore€from€the€amount€that€the€obligation€would€be€based€on€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€parent's€current€income.€Ð è 8  ÐòòSee€id.óó€€In€cases€where€the€variance€equals€or€exceeds€fifteen€percent,€the€guidelines€permit€refusingÐ Ô$  Ðto€decrease€child€support€in€only€two€circumstances:€(1)€when€the€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€parent€is€"willfully€orÐ À  Ðvoluntarily€unemployed€or€under-employed"€and€(2)€if€the€variance€results€from€"a€previous€decisionÐ ¬ü  Ðof€a€court€to€deviate€from€the€guidelines€and€the€circumstances€which€caused€the€deviation€have€notÐ ˜è  Ðchanged."€€òòóóòòSee€idóó.€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case,€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€was€under€a€June€1996€order€setting€child€support€atÐ \¬ Ð$1,591.76.00€per€month.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€1999€income€was€$52,500.00€andÐ H˜ Ðset€child€support€at€$672.50ò òòòó óóó€per€month.€€Upon€review€of€the€record,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtÐ 4„ Ðproperly€reduced€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€obligation,€as€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô€proved€a€significant€variance.€Ð  p ÐHowever,€as€consistent€with€our€discussion€of€child€support€above,€the€trial€court€only€had€theÐ  \ Ðauthority€to€modify€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€child€support€prospectively€from€April€15,€1999,€which€is€the€dateÐ øH ÐMr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ôððs€motion€for€reduction€in€child€support€was€filed.Ð ä4 Ðà  àò òòò¹Ó  ÓóóConclusionòòÐ ¼  ÐÌó óóóÓ  Óà  àFor€the€aforementioned€reasons,€we€affirm€in€part,€reverse€in€part,€and€remand€this€case€toÐ ”ä Ðthe€court€below€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxedÐ €Ð Ðone„half€to€Mrs.€Gibson,€and€one„half€to€Mr.€Ô_ÔProkellÔ_Ô,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô#†X¾XXX¨h5 #ÔÔ#†¼´4»XX¾ #ÔÔ€X¾X»¼´4ÔÐ l¼ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð (#x! Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGE