WPC "KL/nG~I&{X;=S73C7{-Uw (@C0NuE̽mqP-t'pu SATTXe.1(r]7LSVꅖ&WlM*9>5 ӂ9 Na(>_ +*ueAql+D=^*c ߁k<ҭ#ʀ!xܚGt_x>B^j;8oW]/]B3G٫k'Z;ogFg />,ҥ&)'_oM}FaE ^b#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz  f 0D,NprzE]V_UNb 0     B 0 D3 D- 0K ASb 0{ 0D AcHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0p:+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularK+:i+00 C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xU y R$      2  X X  _ CauseofAction:Thefactorfactswhichgiveapersonarighttojudicialredressorrelief  againstanother.Thelegaleffectofanoccurrenceintermsofredresstoapartytotheoccurrence.  Asituationorstateoffactswhichwouldentitlepartytosustainactionandgivehimrighttoseeka  judicialremedyinhisbehalf.BlacksLawDictionary,6thEd.(West1990)atp.221. t Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0    R$      1  X X  _TheJudgmentintheMay30thtrialwasenteredonJune12,2000.   L R$      3  X X  _ ContemptProceeding:Thejudicialhearingortrialconductedtodeterminewhetherone  hasbeenincontemptofcourtandtomakeanappropriatedisposition.Suchproceedingsaresui  generisandnotnecessarilyconnectedtooridentifiedwiththeproceedingoutofwhichthecontempt  arose.BlacksLawDictionary,6thEd.(West1990),atp.319. t (I Z6Times New Roman Regular- -(|G2$ !.8DDd d 8         0  X"X d(|3$ !.8DDd d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8DDd d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8B d d8     _EB8$XXdd 8@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @$ATKNOXVILLE  @ZZAugust29,2001Session $ X XEB #EBXX ޡ#  SANDIC.HUBBARDX XEB #EBXX #v. X XEBԀ#EBXX W# MYRONL.HUBBARDX XEB  " @  DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforBlountCounty  " @Y Y No.E17440Hon.W.DaleYoung,CircuitJudge      `     h FILEDSEPTEMBER26,2001    @*AV) ` dE<` A߈   @No.E200100110COAR3CV }  AV) ` dE<T` A U   TheTrialCourtgrantedappelleeJudgementbeforethe30daystoanswerprocessprovidedinthe < RulesofCivilProcedurehadexpired.Onappeal,wevacateandremand. (x #EBXX ޭ#X XEB Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtVacated.  < HerschelPickensFranks#EBX #X X.EB,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichHoustonM.Goddard,#EBX #X X.EB  P.J.,andCharlesD.Susano,JR.,J.#EBX j#X X.EB,joined.  MarthaMearesandGretchenS.Johnson,Maryville,Tennessee,forAppellant,SandiC.Hubbard. ` DavidM.Boyd,Maryville,Tennessee,forAppellee,MyronL.Hubbard. 8 @66' OPINION #EBXX #X XEBԈ #$# #EBXX ? #X XEB0  0` (#(# ` (#` (#    ` ThepartiestothisactionweregrantedadivorceonDecember16,1999.OnApril &!& 27,2000,theattorneyforthedefendantfiledapleadingstyled MotionintheCircuitCourt,asking '"' interaliathatuponahearingofthecausethattheCourt findtheplaintiffinwillfulcontempt,and p(#( thatplaintiffbepunishedaccordinglyandberequiredtoreturnallpropertyawardedtothedefendant \)$) inproperform,andberequiredtopaythedefendantanyandallcostsfordamagestotheresidence. H*%* FiledalongwiththatdocumentwasasummonsrecitingthatthepartySandiC.Hubbardwas 4+&+ commandedto answertotheComplaintherewithserveduponyouwithinthirtydaysafterservice  ,p', oftheSummonsandComplaintuponyou.ThesummonswasreturnedreflectingserviceonSandi  -\(- C.HubbardonMay5,2000.Alsoaccompanyingthe Motionandthesummonswasanotice  preparedandsignedbyMyronL.Hubbardscounsel,purportingtogivenoticetoSandiC.Hubbard  thatshewasrequiredtoappearonthe30thdayofMay,2000forahearingon theattachedMotion.  Thislikewisewasservedalongwiththesummonsand Motion.SandiHubbarddidnotappearon t May30,andtheTrialJudgegranted toPetitioneraJudgmentagainstsaidRespondentandentered ` anawardofdamagesintheamountof$10,028.65 asaresultoftheremovalofpersonalproperty L  awardedtopetitioner. #  1      ׀ 8     ` OnJune29,SandiC.HubbardfiledaMotiontoAlterorSetAsidetheJudgment  ` and/orGrantaNewTrial.TheTrialCourtoverruledthatMotiononDecember7,2000,andSandi  L  C.Hubbard,appellant,hasappealed.  8     ` Essentially,theissueonappealiswhethertheappelleespostjudgmentpleading   containingtheswornverificationofappellee,costbond,asummonstotheappellantseeking   punishmentforcontemptandmoneydamageswasa Motioninthepriordivorceactionora   separatelegalproceedingwhich,undertheRulesofCivilProcedure,wouldallowappellantthirty   daystoanswerthepleadingasacomplaint. p    ` Wheretheoperativefactsarenotindispute,thescopeofourreviewisaquestionof H law,withnopresumptionofcorrectnessoftheTrialCourtsdecision.Brownv.WalmartDiscount 4 Cities,12S.W.3d785,787(Tenn.2000).Thegravamenofappelleesclaimswasappellantsfailure  p torelinquishpropertythatwasdueappelleeasapartofthepropertydivisioninthedivorce  \ settlement,andforallegeddamagestosomeoftheproperty.Propertysettlementsareessentially H contractsbetweenthedivorcingpartiesandareenforcedandconstruedasareothercontractswith 4 respecttotheirinterpretation,meaningandeffect.Johnsonv.Johnson,37S.W.3d892,896(Tenn.   2001).However,apropertysettlementmergesintothefinaldecree,therebylosingitscontractual   nature,andthetrialcourtenteringthedecreeretainsjurisdictiontoenforceit.Morrisseyv.  Morrissey,377S.W.2d944,946(Tenn.1964).Butapropertydivisionadjudicatedinthedivorce  decreeisnotsubjecttomodificationifthereisnoappealwithinthetimeallowedbyTenn.R.App.  P.4(a). l    ` Itisthereviewingcourtsfunctiontoreviewtheadequacyofpleadingstogiveeffect D! totheirsubstance,ratherthantotheirformandterminology.StateDept.ofHumanSvs.V.Defriece, 0"  927S.W.2d954,959(Tenn.Ct.App.1997).TheSupremeCourthasstated: #l! 0  0` (#(#[I]fabillcontainsallegationssufficient,iftrue,toentitlethecomplainanttosome $D # relief,thefactthatthebillisinartfullydrawn,orismisnamedbythedraftsman,will %0!$ notjustifyamotiontodismiss.Insuchacase,theCourtjudgesthebill,notbyits &"% name,orwantoftechnicalprecisioninitsframeandaverments,butbyitssubstance, '#& andthemattersofequityitsetsforth.Whilethepropernameofthebillwillnot (#' atonefordefectsofsubstance,yetpropersubstancewillatoneforadefectinthe  name.Thenameofabillismerematterofform,andisabsolutelyimmaterial;and,  whateverbeitsname,theCourtwilllooktoitsallegationsandprayers,andjudgethe  billthereby,andnotbytheparticularnameitmayhappentobear.t` (#` (# Paducahv.CityofJohnsonCity,896S.W.2d767,769(Tenn.1995),citingGibsonsSuitsin L  Chancery,276,p.324(1955). 8     ` Intheinstantcase,thefinaldecreewasenteredfourmonthsbeforethe Motionfor  ` contemptinquestionwasfiled.CounselforappelleeassertsandadmitsthathisMotiondealtwith  L  theenforcementofthefinaldecree.HedidnotseekreliefunderTenn.R.Civ.P.60.02,whichis  8  theonlyauthorityunderwhichtheCourtcouldreopentheJudgment.AlthoughtheTrialCourts $  Orderdoesnotspecificallysay default,theattachedmemorandumdoesrefertoitasa hearing   onthedefaultandthegrantingofthesametookplaceonthe30thdayfromthefilingoftheMotion   ... .TheOrderalsoreferencesthepetitionofthepetitioner,anditawards moneyjudgmenton   thedefault.Appellees Motionaversthattheappellanthadintentionallydamagedtheresidence   andotherpropertyawardedtoappellee,andtheseallegationsraisedcompletelynewanddifferent p factsthatdidnotexistatthetimeofthedecree.Appelleestatedadistinctcauseofaction  #  2      ׀inwhich \ hesoughtjudgment,i.e.,damagestohispropertyandpunishmentforviolationoftheCourts H Judgment.SeePilev.Pile,183S.W.1004(Tenn.1916);Hicksv.Hicks,176S.W.2d371(Tenn. 4 1943).Theproperremedyforviolationofacourtorderisapetitionforcontemptofcourt,anda  p civilcontemptactionistheappropriateremedytoenforcethetermsofafinaljudgment,suchasa  \ partysfailuretoabidebythetermsofthepropertysettlement.Cannonv.Cannon,241S.W.2d435, H 438(Tenn.Ct.App.1951),cert.denied. 4    ` ThisCourthasaddressedtheissueofwhethercontemptproceedings, #  3      ׀areindependent   actionscollateraltothecasesorproceedingsfromwhichtheyarise.InPoffv.Poff,1993WL73897,  No.01A019301CV00024(Tenn.Ct.App.,Mar.17,1993),JudgeKochsaid:  0  0` (#(#WefindthemajorityruleaccuratelyreflectsTennesseeLaw.Contemptproceedings l commencedaftertheentryofanotherwisefinalorderintheunderlyingcaseshould X  beviewedasindependentproceedings.Accordingly,theyarenotpartofthesubject  matteroftheunderlyingcaseandarenotamongtheissuesthatmustberesolved  beforeanotherwisefinalorderintheunderlyingcasewillbeconsideredfinalforthe  purposesofTenn.R.App.P.3(a).Toholdotherwisewouldpermittheparty t prevailingintheunderlyingproceedingtofrustrateanappealindefinitelyby ` forestallingtheentryofafinalorderwithaseriesofcontemptpetitioners.L ` (#` (# Id.at*2. $ t    ` Weholdthatalthoughappelleespleadingisstyledasa motion,itinfact  L  constitutedanewcauseofactionseekingmonetarydamagesaswellaspunishmentforcontempt,  8  whichentitledappellanttothefullthirtydaystoanswertheactionundertheRulesofProcedure,and $  theTrialCourt,inenteringaJudgmentagainstherpriortotheexpirationofthethirtydayswithin   whichtoanswer,actedimpermissiblyundertheRules.      ` Accordingly,wevacatetheJudgmentandremandforfurtherproceedingsconsistent   withthisOpinion.ThecostoftheappealisassessedtoMyronL.Hubbard. p    `     h     _________________________ H    `     h     HerschelPickensFranks,J. 4