ÿWPC ¨œú{¥ ©iÉøù¹Fç›À[¸¶§d…FQb™xe挪i†`=¬ éÿChÚu¸ýÒ<ìÉôâMí+6éè˜Û0˜.{2 Ÿñ…¬†åA¯mÐ(bâ>ë¥.J=Ö¿]pÏ¡rÕN± íÑ.¾Bú B0'Oh_”Iã#iJTcq®2°É2 DZt+çŸD,¡ÆXHÄA¢Dø7O<»Ï9.À¡nϰ».§¶>¬9•±s‘¢µfûËÈuƒlþUÆ4]s:oø.¯Ï¿î†ríµKü.úZ ÎD]u錾q§É¿¯2kÆhpÙ©tZ¯Ìéç}Ÿup (*O§'„þדÙSlô¾h•­Tz=@í]IaÍÎOŠOØCšrÆ|Ðc[8¹ã.{]ús˜vÞ®‘FÓƒâÑŠTеܫ@4:ÏjùNP‘BÔ^/ÑXéðÞ£éxWyw(` H¦B„È'ؾfqŒ·n('8Æ[ŽEú»K)$ÚOJä0aU3Ãg¼³GtQEWyÊÒ—.wcfb %\U Nb 0ˆ°U"N8^ †w’4– zªÒ$ ö  m #Á Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ11N÷÷÷Eùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùbûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûûû 0ë Bîî 0¤  D5¯ D-ä 0K AS\Ư 0¤u 0D A«]»)wF˜ Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular6l-s 9‚±,â,ƒŠBackup ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2u$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨Õò»»Ô d(|3?~$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?~$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€=»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼=»»»ÔÑ8€M‘XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÌ=ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼=»îîÌ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓMarch€20,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XM‘X»¼=ÔÌò òÔ#†¼=»XXM‘ó#ÔSTEVEN€ALLEN€Ô_ÔJAMESONÔ_Ô€v.€KATRINA€LINN€Ô_ÔREDMUNDÔ_ÔÔ‡XM‘X»¼=Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Rutherford€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€97DR„453€€€€€€Robert€F.€Ô_ÔCorlewÔ_Ô€III,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„01108„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€28,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  Óà  àÌÓÓÓ  ÓÓ XÓThisÔ#†¼=»XXM‘¥#ÔÔ‡¼=»»¼=ÔÔ‡XM‘X»¼=Ô€is€an€appeal€from€the€trial€courtððs€final€order€denying€appellantððs€petition€for€a€changeÐ d´ Ðof€the€sole€care,€custody€and€control€of€the€partiesðð€three€minor€children€and€the€trial€courtððs€orderÐ P  Ðdenying€appellantððs€alternative€petition€for€an€increase€in€visitation.€€We€hold€that€the€trial€courtÐ <Œ Ðproperly€denied€a€change€of€the€sole€care,€custody€and€control€and€properly€denied€appellantððsÐ (x Ðalternative€petition€for€increased€visitation.€Counsel€for€the€appellee€has€petitioned€this€court€forÐ d Ðattorneyððs€fees€assessed€for€the€hearings€in€the€trial€court€and€for€attorneyððs€fees€in€the€immediateÐ P Ðappellate€case€contending€that€the€appeal€is€frivolous.€We€decline€to€award€attorneyððs€fees.Ð ì< ÐÔ#†XM‘XXXM‘}#ÔÔ#†¼=»XXM‘œ#ÔÓ<ÓÓ XHÓÔ‡XM‘X»¼=ÔÌÌò òTenn.€R.€P.€3€Appeal€as€a€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed;€Motion€forÐ ° ÐAttorney's€Fees€Denied.ó óÐ œì ÐÌÌòòÓ  ÓHamilton€V.€Ô_ÔGaydenÔ_ÔÔ#†¼=»àXM‘z #ÔÔ‡XM‘X.¼=Ôóó,€Sp.€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Ô_ÔCantrellÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,Ð `° ÐM.S.óó€and€òòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€joined.Ð L œ ÐÌCharles€G.€Ô_ÔBlackardÔ_Ô€III,€Brentwood,€Tennessee,€for€Appellant,€Katrina€Linn€Ô_ÔRedmundÔ_Ô.Ð $"t! ÐÌJames€Robin€Ô_ÔMcKinneyÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€Appellee,€Steven€Allen€Ô_ÔJamesonÔ_Ô.Ð ü#L# ÐÌÓ; ÓÌò òOPINIONÐ À&"& ÐÌó óBACKGROUNDÔ#†¼=»XXM‘œ #ÔÔ‡XM‘X»¼=ÔÐ ˜(è#( ÐÔ#†¼=»XXM‘` #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XM‘X»¼=ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘ÔÓ  Ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à @È àà0 @  àà0@x (# (#àà0@Ð x(#x(#à€Ð „)Ô$) ÐÓÓà  àThis€is€an€appeal€of€the€trial€courtððs€April€5,€2001€order€dismissing€the€appellantððs€petitionÐ p*À%* Ðfor€change€of€the€exclusive€care,€custody€and€control€of€the€partiesðð€three€minor€sons€and€€the€trialÐ \+¬&+ Ðcourtððs€dismissal€of€appellantððs€alternative€petition€seeking€an€increase€in€visitation€with€the€partiesððÐ H,˜', Ðminor€sons.€The€April€5,€2001€final€order€was€the€latest€of€several€previous€trial€court€decreesÐ 4-„(-ý Ðfollowing€numerous€bitter€and€hostile€custody€and€visitation€disputes€between€the€parties.€€In€thisÐ ° Ðlast€court€proceeding,€the€trial€€judge€conducted€a€two€day€hearing€and€found€that€there€was€not€aÐ œì Ðsufficient€change€of€circumstances€to€warrant€a€change€of€the€exclusive€care,€custody€and€control€toÐ ˆØ Ðthe€appellant;€the€trial€judge€also€dismissed€appellantððs€alternative€motion€for€increased€visitationÐ tÄ Ðrights.€The€trial€judge€rendered€€findings€of€€fact€and€conclusion€of€law.à  àÐ `° ÐÓ XÓÐ L œ ÐAfter€numerous€previous€hearings€involving€disputes€over€custody€and€visitation€issues,Ð 8 ˆ Ðincluding€one€series€of€hearings€lasting€over€thirty€hours,€the€court€ò òó óissued€ò òó óextensive,€multipleÐ $ t Ðfindings€of€facts€and€conclusions€of€law.€The€first€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€wereÐ  ` Ðsubmitted€in€September€1998€after€the€first€contested€custody€and€visitation€proceeding.Ð ü L  ÐÓ XôÓÓ XÓÐ è 8  ÐIn€the€1998€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€the€court€found€that€the€appellee/fatherÐ Ô$  Ðwas€the€better€fit€parent€to€be€awarded€sole€care,€custody€and€control€of€the€partiesðð€minor€childrenÐ À  Ðwith€liberal€visitation€rights€to€the€appellant/mother.Ð ¬ü  ÐÓ XøÓÓ XÓÐ ˜è  ЀIn€the€first€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€the€court€considered€the€ten€prong€factorsÐ „Ô  Ðset€out€in€Ô_ÔTenn.CodeÔ_Ô€Ann€ðð€36„6„106€(1996).€€After€considering€the€multitude€of€€factors,€most€ofÐ pÀ Ðwhich€were€cited€by€the€trial€judge€as€negatives€directed€respectively€to€both€parties,€the€courtÐ \¬ Ðgranted€the€sole€care€custody€and€control€to€the€appellee/father€subject€to€liberal€visitation€rights€withÐ H˜ Ðthe€appellant/mother.€Among€other€considerations,€the€trial€judge€specifically€referred€to€the€physicalÐ 4„ Ðhealth€and€mental€health€shortcomings€of€the€appellant.€€In€addition,€poignantly,€during€the€1998Ð  p Ðhearings€the€court€also€interviewed€the€partiesðð€minor€sons€and€considered€their€preferences€as€toÐ  \ Ðwho€they€wished€to€be€the€primary€custodial€parent.Ð øH ÐÓ XhÓÓ XÓÐ ä4 ÐAs€a€result€of€this€original€custody€decision,€the€court€awarded€the€appellant€liberal€visitationÐ Ð  Ðrights€including€visitation€periods€tantamount€to€one€half€the€summer€and€equal€holiday€visitation,Ð ¼  Ðò òó óevery€other€weekend€and€other€special€times.€The€trial€courtððs€original€findings€of€€fact€and€visitationÐ ¨ø Ðorder€ò òó ówere€based€on€the€premise€that€the€visitation€should€be€liberal,€but€circumscribed€by€the€factÐ ”ä Ðthat€the€appellant€had€moved€her€residence€to€Michigan.€Ð €Ð ÐÓ XUÓÓ XÓÐ l¼ ÐIn€the€original€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€the€trial€court€also€ordered€that€theÐ X ¨ Ðappellant€should€be€granted€liberal€visitation€including€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekðð€should€she€returnÐ D!” Ðto€the€Murfreesboro€area.€€The€original€final€order€was€€not€appealed€by€either€party.€Ð 0"€  ÐÓ XÊÓÓ XÓÐ #l! ÐAfter€the€original€custody€and€visitation€order€was€entered,€€disputes€between€the€partiesÐ $X" Ðarose€when€in€2000€the€appellant€moved€her€residence€back€to€the€Murfreesboro€area€from€Michigan.Ð ô$D # ÐÓ X]ÓÓ XÓÐ à%0!$ ÐThe€extent€of€€ð ðevening€visitation€during€the€weekðð€became€the€primary€focus€for€the€first€Ð Ì&"% Ðround€of€disagreements.€€Following€a€hearing€in€February€2000,€the€trial€court€ostensibly€clarifiedÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€meaning€and€intent€of€the€provision€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekðð€that€was€ordered€in€the€originalÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdecree€governing€custody€and€visitation.€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÓ XwÓÓ XÓÐ |*Ì%) ÐIn€the€2000€hearing,€the€trial€court€interpreted€the€original€decree€stating,€ð ðNow,€frankly,Ð ° Ðâ âevenings€during€the€week,€with€all€due€respect,€I€donððt€think€would€mean€every€evening.ðð€Ð œì ÐÓ X`!ÓÓ XÓÐ ˆØ ÐHowever,€at€that€point€the€trial€judge€did€not€enter€a€formal€ruling€on€the€issue€of€what€wasÐ tÄ Ðintended€by€the€proviso€ð ðevening€visitation€during€the€weekðð,€but€instead€ordered€the€parties€toÐ `° Ðmediation.€The€mediation€was€unsuccessful.€Ð L œ ÐÓ X‡"ÓÓ XÓÐ 8 ˆ ÐThe€court€has€ordered€mediation€over€issues€of€custody€and€visitation€on€several€occasions€Ð $ t Ðin€this€litigious€case.€All€of€the€attempts€to€mediate€the€parties€differences€over€visitation€and€custodyÐ  ` Ðhave€failed.€€€€€€€Ð ü L  ÐÓ Xé#ÓÒ°ÒÒû°ÒÓ ¨ýÓÓ$X°¸ ˜X°œX$ÓÓ XÓÐ è 8  ÐThe€record€is€replete€with€court€appearances€and€hearings€and€reflects€the€inability€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðparties€to€agree€on€much€of€anything€in€reference€to€rearing€their€three€sons.€For€instance,€duringÐ À  Ðanother€hearing€in€March€2000,€the€court€received€the€insightful€testimony€of€a€psychotherapist,Ð ¬ü  ÐKatherine€Rebecca€Hill€Taylor,€who€counsels€with€the€three€minor€children€particularly€the€twoÐ ˜è  Ðoldest€sons.€The€expert€testified€in€part:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð „Ô  Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð pÀ Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€It€is€my€opinion€that€the€parents€.€.€.€.€need€joint€therapy€to€help€them€to€put€aside€Ð \¬ Ðtheir€hostilities€for€the€sake€of€the€children€and€assist€them€in€working€together€to€Ð H˜ Ðco„parent€the€children€that€they€brought€into€this€world.€If€something€like€this€Ð 4„ Ðcannot€be€worked€out€and€it€could€require€the€children€to€be€placed€temporarily€in€Ð  p Ða€neutral€residence€in€order€for€them€to€be€out€of€harmððs€way,€I€would€support€such.€Ð  \ ÐThe€kids€need€a€break.€I€sincerely€hope€that€things€may€be€resolved€so€that€harassment€Ð øH Ðand€loyalty€ploys€will€be€halted€and€the€boys€can€enjoy,€very€simply,€childhood.Ð ä4 ÐÒ°ûC%ÒÓ( °œXX°¸ ˜X_%(ÓÓ ¨ýQ%ÓÓ Xƒ%ÓÒð%°ÒÓ X‡%ÓÐ Ð  ÐÒ°5%ÒÒ°,ÒÓ X ,Ó€€€€€à  àOn€April€3,€2000,€the€court€entered€its€own€parenting€plan.€The€parenting€plan€providedÐ ¼  Ðappellant€with€a€one€evening€visitation,€but€not€overnight.€The€trial€court€filed€another€findings€ofÐ ¨ø Ðfact€and€conclusions€of€law€after€this€particular€hearing.Ð ”ä Ðà  àÌà  àLater,€after€another€contested€hearing€on€custody€and€visitation€issues,€the€trial€court€enteredÐ l¼ Ðan€order€which€for€the€second€time€slightly€modified€the€earlier€parenting€plan,€providing€theÐ X ¨ Ðappellant€with€greater€visitation€rights,€with€the€exception€of€the€ongoing€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekððÐ D!” Ðcontroversy.€That€order€further€refined€and€defined€schedules€including€the€physical€transfer€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðchildren,€the€parties€not€even€being€able€to€agree€on€how€and€where€to€transfer€the€three€minor€sons.€Ð #l! Ðà  àÌà  àStill,€another€hearing€on€visitation€ensued€and€the€trial€court€again€slightly€modified€theÐ ô$D # Ðdetails€of€the€visitation€and€associated€matters.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àIn€December€2000€and€early€2001€the€appellant,€in€a€responsive€pleadings€to€motions€filedÐ ¸'#& Ðby€the€appellee,€cross„petitioned€the€court€for€a€change€in€the€exclusive€care,€control€and€custody€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€three€minor€sons,€or€alternatively€for€increased€visitation€rights.€€It€is€from€this€last€proceedingÐ )à$( Ðâ âthat€resulted€in€an€order€dated€April€5,€2001€that€appellant€has€appealed.€Ð |*Ì%) Ѐ€€€à  àThe€court€denied€the€petition€for€change€of€custody€filed€by€appellant,€keeping€in€place€theÐ ° Ðâ âprevious€parental€planning€order€of€April€3,€2000,€as€twice€amended.€Ð œì ÐÌ€€€€€à  àThe€final€parenting€plan€contained€in€the€October€17,€2000€order,€as€twice€amended,€is€onlyÐ tÄ Ða€slight€modification€of€the€original€1998€custody€and€visitation€decree,€with€the€exception€of€theÐ `° Ðarguable€difference€in€interpretation€of€what€was€meant€by€the€provision€€ð ðvisitation€during€eveningsÐ L œ Ðduring€the€weekðð€contained€in€the€July€1998€order€and€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌ€€€€€€à  àA€primary€example€of€the€trial€courtððs€modification€of€the€original€decree€relates€to€weekendÐ  ` Ðvisitation.€The€current€October€17,€2000€parenting€plan€affords€the€appellant€weekend€visitation€onÐ ü L  Ðalternating€weekends€as€opposed€to€the€original€decree€which€provided€for€weekend€visitation€on€theÐ è 8  Ðfirst,€third€and€fifth€weekends,€the€latter€having€led€to€uncompromising€disputes€between€the€parties.€Ð Ô$  Ѐ€€à  àÐ À  Ðà  àThe€appellantððs€primary€complaints€with€the€trial€judgeððs€April€5,€2001€final€order€are€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€trial€judge€did€not€give€the€proper€weight€to€the€evidence€introduced€during€the€2001€hearingsÐ ˜è  Ðrelating€to€the€question€of€whether€there€had€been€a€sufficient€change€of€circumstances€that€supportÐ „Ô  Ða€change€of€custody;€aò òó ólternatively,€the€trial€judge€erred€in€not€ordering€the€appellant€€increasedÐ pÀ Ðvisitation€with€the€partiesðð€minor€sons€as€contemplated€by€the€original€decree€ò òó ówhich€provided€forÐ \¬ Ðð ðliberal€visitation.ððÐ H˜ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àThe€appellant€further€complains€about€ò òó óa€perceived€narrow€definition€of€visitation€with€theÐ  p Ðpartiesðð€minor€sons€on€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekðð,€which€the€court€has€restricted€to€one€evening€onÐ  \ ÐTuesdays€(not€overnight).Ð øH Ѐ̀€€€€à  àIn€the€custody€phase€of€the€last€hearingò òó ó,€appellant€argues€and€relies€on€the€factors€enumeratedÐ Ð  Ðin€Ô_ÔTenn.CodeÔ_Ô€Ann.€ðð€Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘â #ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô36„6„106€(7)€and€(10)€as€the€basis€for€the€appeal.€Appellant€asserts€that€theÐ ¼  Ðtestimony€of€the€three€sons€at€the€last€hearing€reflects€that€they€want€to€be€under€the€sole,€care€andÐ ¨ø Ðcustody€of€their€mother;€the€appellant€further€argues€that€the€appellee€was€clearly€shown€to€have€beenÐ ”ä Ðpromoting€false€accusations€of€mental€illness€and€false€accusations€of€sexual€impropriety,Ð €Ð Ðparticularly€with€the€partiesðð€minor€ò òó óyounger€son.Ð l¼ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àAt€the€hearing€below,€the€appellant€also€raised€the€less€significant€issues€relating€to€theÐ D!” Ðpartiesðð€minor€sons€being€at€the€appelleeððs€house€without€supervision€after€school€and€also€allegedÐ 0"€  Ðthat€on€occasions,€the€appelleeò òó óòò€óówas€unable€to€leave€work€to€tend€to€a€medical€condition€of€one€of€theÐ #l! Ðsons.Ð $X" Ѐ€€€€à  àOn€the€issue€of€increased€visitation€rights,€the€appellant€asserts€that€the€original€decree€ofÐ ô$D # Ðdivorce€that€provided€for€liberal€visitation€has€been€erroneously€modified€by€the€trial€judge€as€a€resultÐ à%0!$ Ðof€successive€hearings€and€has€deprived€he€mother€of€ð ðliberal€visitationðð€as€originally€contemplatedÐ Ì&"% Ðin€the€original€decree€relating€to€custody€and€visitation.€Ð ¸'#& Ѐ€€€€à  àÐ ¤(ô#' Ðà  àFollowing€the€most€recent€two€day€hearing€from€which€the€appellant€appeals,€the€court€issuedÐ )à$( Ðthe€following€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law:Ð |*Ì%) Ѐ€€€€€€€€Ð h+¸&* ÐÒ°ÒÒ°Ò€€€€€Since€the€time€of€the€last€hearing€the€major€circumstances€which€have€changedÐ ° Ðinclude€the€separation€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔJamesonÔ_Ô€and€his€current€wife,€and€the€filing€of€aÐ œì Ðdivorce€action€between€those€parties;€€the€proven€scholastic€progress€of€the€children;Ð ˆØ Ðevidence€that€at€times€the€children,€or€one€of€them,€has€remained€without€supervisionÐ tÄ Ðat€the€home;€and€the€fact€that€Ms.€Ô_ÔRedmundÔ_Ô€is€now€working€regularly€as€anÐ `° Ðeducational€assistant€for€the€county€school€system.Ð L œ Ð.€.€.€.€Ð 8 ˆ Ѐ€€€€The€court€€heard€from€each€of€the€parties€and€each€of€the€children.€The€break„upÐ $ t Ðof€Mr.€Ô_ÔJamesonÔ_Ôððs€marriage€would€appear€to€be€an€unanticipated€circumstance,€but€inÐ  ` Ðfairness,€none€of€the€other€circumstances€appear€to€the€court€to€have€beenÐ ü L  Ðunanticipated.€.€.€.€The€emotional€trauma€of€a€divorce€action,€the€ensuing€bitternessÐ è 8  Ðbetween€the€parents€and€their€frequent€appearances€in€court,€as€well€as€the€generalÐ Ô$  Ðinability€of€the€parents€to€cooperate€with€each€other€and€actively€squabble€onÐ À  Ðoccasion€in€the€presence€of€the€children€are€all€circumstances.€.€.€.€Ð ¬ü  Ð.€.€.€.€Ð ˜è  Ѐ€€€€Considering€all€of€the€matters€before€the€court,€the€court€finds€that€insufficientÐ „Ô  Ðcircumstances€have€been€demonstrated€to€the€court€to€warrant€a€change€of€custody.Ð pÀ ÐFurther,€the€court€recognizes€that€the€children€in€their€testimonies€clearly€appear€toÐ \¬ Ðlove€both€parents,€and€wish€to€voice€opinions€which€would€be€pleasing€to€bothÐ H˜ Ðparents.€€The€court€finds€no€basis€for€upsetting€the€established€schedule€of€time€whenÐ 4„ Ðthe€children€spend€every€other€weekend€with€their€mother€and€a€period€of€time€afterÐ  p Ðschool€on€Tuesday€with€their€mother€and€otherwise€spend€€time€with€their€fatherÐ  \ Ðexcept€for€holidays€and€special€occasions.€Generally,€and€perhaps€also€in€this€case,Ð øH Ðstability€is€a€virtue€and€decisions€which€cause€the€children€to€be€with€one€parent€oneÐ ä4 Ðday€and€one€parent€the€next€day€probably€do€not€lead€to€the€best€academicÐ Ð  Ðenvironment.Ð ¼  ÐÌÒ°KCÒÒ°=CÒ€€€€€à  àThe€testimony€and€evidence€€introduced€before€the€trial€judge€during€the€last€two€day€hearingÐ ”ä Ðalso€included€the€testimony€of€the€partiesðð€three€minor€sons,€evidence€of€€false€accusations€of€sexualÐ €Ð Ðmisconduct€made€by€the€appellee,€and€accusations€by€the€appellee€conveyed€to€the€minor€sons€thatÐ l¼ Ðappellant€is€mentally€illÐ X ¨ Ð.€Ð D!” Ѐ€€€€€à  àThere€was€also€evidence€that€both€parties€were€in€dire€financial€straits,€including€evidenceÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€appelleeððs€bankruptcy€and€the€appellantððs€partial€dependence€on€her€parents€for€Ô_ÔsubstitenceÔ_Ô.€Ð #l! Ðà  àÌà  àThere€was€proof€that€both€parties€were€guilty€of€having€the€minor€sons€at€their€home€afterÐ ô$D # Ðschool€without€supervision.Ð à%0!$ Ѐ€€€€Ð Ì&"% Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€STANDARD€OF€REVIEWÐ ¸'#& Ѐ€€€Ð ¤(ô#' Ѐ€€€€€à  àThe€standard€of€review€in€this€case€is€de€novo€on€the€record€accompanied€by€a€presumptionÐ )à$( Ðof€correctness€of€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€below.€òòÔ_ÔHassÔ_Ô€v€Ô_ÔKnightonÔ_Ôóó,€676€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2òòóód€554,€555€(Tenn.Ð |*Ì%) Ð1984).€€In€matters€of€divorce€and€child€custody,€trial€courts€are€vested€with€broad€discretion,€andÐ h+¸&* Ðappellate€courts€will€not€interfere€with€the€trial€courtððs€decision€except€upon€a€showing€of€erroneousÐ ° Ðexercise€of€that€discretion.€òòSee€Whitaker€v.€Whitakeróó,€957€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2d€834,€836„837€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð œì Ð1997).Ð ˆØ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àThe€appealing€party€must€show€that€the€evidence€preponderated€against€the€findings.€òòSeeÐ `° ÐDoles€v.€Dolesóó,€848€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2d€656,€661€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àANALYSISÐ $ t Ѐ€€€Ð  ` Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€First,€we€address€the€issue€of€whether€the€court€erred€in€not€changing€the€sole€care,€custodyÐ ü L  Ðand€control€to€the€appellant.€The€appellant€alleges€that€there€was€a€sufficient€change€of€circumstancesÐ è 8  Ðas€reflected€in€the€evidence€at€the€last€two€day€hearing€and€that€the€court€erred€in€not€changing€care,Ð Ô$  Ðcustody€and€control€to€the€appellant.€Ð À  ЀÌà  àAppellantððs€allegations€of€change€of€circumstances€involve€three€main€areas:€€(1)€the€appelleeÐ ˜è  Ðhas€falsely€accused€her€of€sexual€abuse€of€her€three€sons;€(2)€the€appellee€has€portrayed€her€to€theÐ „Ô  Ðthree€children€as€being€mentally€ill;€and€(3)€the€three€sons,€in€varying€degrees,€want€to€visit€moreÐ pÀ Ðoften€with€her,€and€in€the€case€of€the€youngest€son,€he€wants€to€live€with€her.€Ð \¬ ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô_ÔTenn.CodeÔ_Ô€Ann.€ðð€Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘‹<#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€36„6„106€(7)€and€(10)€Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘ÓY#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô(Supp.€1998)€are€cited€by€the€appellant€as€the€basisÐ 4„ Ðof€ò òó óher€argument:€€€€Ð  p ЀÌÒ°ÒÒ°Ò€€€€€In.€.€.€.€any.€.€.€.€proceeding€requiring€the€court€to€make€a€custody€determination.Ð øH Ð.€.€.€determination€shall€be€made€upon€the€basis€of€the€best€interest€of€the€child.€.€.€.the€Ð ä4 Ðcourt€shall€consider€all€relevant€factors€including€the€following€where€applicable:Ð Ð  Ð.€.€.€.€Ð ¼  Ð(7)€the€reasonable€preference€of€the€child,€if€the€child€is€12€years€of€age€or€older;€theÐ ¨ø Ðcourt€may€hear€the€preference€of€a€younger€child€upon€request.€.€.€.Ð ”ä Ð.€.€.€.€Ð €Ð Ð(10)€Each€parentððs€past€and€potential€for€future€performance€of€parentingÐ l¼ Ðresponsibilities,€including€the€willingness€of€each€of€the€parents€to€facilitate€andÐ X ¨ Ðencourage€a€close€and€continuing€parent„child€relationship€between€the€child€and€theÐ D!” Ðother€parent,€consistent€with€the€best€interest€of€the€child.Ð 0"€  ÐÒ°ÓZÒÒ°ÅZÒà  àÌ€€€€€à  àIn€applying€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÔ#†XM‘XXXM‘,Z#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€36„6„Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘4_#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô106€(10)€(Supp.€1998),€the€appellant€cites€to€theÐ $X" Ðtestimony€reflecting€that€the€appellee€continuously€accuses€the€appellant€of€sexual€misconductÐ ô$D # Ðespecially€with€the€youngest€son.€Further,€appellant€alleges€that€the€appellee€accuses€her€of€beingÐ à%0!$ Ðmentally€ill€in€the€presence€of€the€three€minor€sons.€€Ð Ì&"% Ѐ€€Ð ¸'#& Ѐ€€€€à  àCuriously,€the€appellee,€at€the€last€hearing€stipulated€that€the€accusation€of€sexual€misconductÐ ¤(ô#' Ðon€part€of€the€appellant€was€untrue.€While€this€court€takes€a€dim€view€of€this€type€of€false€accusation,Ð )à$( Ðâ âthis€court€notes€that€the€trial€court€below€has€ruled€previously€on€the€motives€of€the€appellee€forÐ |*Ì%) Ðmaking€these€accusations€ò òó óat€earlier€timesò òó ó,€and€the€court€has€found€in€previous€findings€of€fact€thatÐ ° Ðthe€accusations€were€not€made€in€bad€faith.€Ð œì Ðâ âÌ€€€€€à  àThe€appelleeò òó óòò€óóalleges€that€the€appellantððsò òó óòò€óómisbehavior€relates€to€allowing€the€sons€to€watchÐ tÄ Ðquestionable€videos€and€television€programs€such€as€the€ð ðJerry€Springerðð€show.€The€accusations€areÐ `° Ðnot€of€a€sexual€physical€nature€between€the€appellant€and€the€children€and€do€not€appear€to€be€aÐ L œ Ðsignificant€factor€in€the€decisions€of€the€trial€judge.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌ€€€€€€à  àThe€trial€courtððs€factual€determination€involving€witness€credibility€will€be€given€great€weightÐ  ` Ðon€appeal.€òòSee€Ô_ÔBarnhillÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔBarnhillÔ_Ôóó,€826€S.W.2d€443,€448€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991)òòóó.€We€find€no€errorÐ ü L  Ðin€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€accusations€were€not€made€in€bad€faith.€Ð è 8  Ѐ̀€€€€à  àThe€appellant€complains€that€the€trial€court€did€not€give€sufficient€weight€to€the€issue€of€theÐ À  Ðappellee€ò òó óòòóóaccusing€the€appellantò òó óòò€óóof€mental€illness€in€front€of€the€children.€The€record€again€reflectsÐ ¬ü  Ðthat€in€earlier€hearings€the€trial€judge€found€as€a€fact€that€appellant€was€shown€to€be€suffering€fromÐ ˜è  Ðmental€illness.€There€was€previous€testimony€from€Dr.€William€€Kenner€to€the€effect€that€appellantÐ „Ô  Ðis€suffering€from€depression.€While€the€trial€court€has€found€as€a€fact€that€the€appellantððs€mentalÐ pÀ Ðcondition€has€improved€considerably,€the€trial€court€has€also€previously€found€as€a€fact€that€theÐ \¬ Ðaccusations€of€mental€illness€made€by€the€appelleeò òó óòò€óówere€not€made€in€bad€faith.€We€find€no€error€inÐ H˜ Ðthe€trial€courtððs€ruling€that€the€accusations€of€mental€illness€were€not€made€in€bad€faith.Ð 4„ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àTenn.€Code€Ann.ððÔ#†XM‘XXXM‘|_#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€36„6„106Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘Lk#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€(7)€(Supp.€1998)€is€applicable€to€the€testimony€of€the€threeÐ  \ Ðminor€sons€at€the€last€hearing.€A€review€of€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€the€two€older€sons€askedÐ øH Ðthe€court€to€change€custody.€While€the€youngest€son€does€equivocate€on€the€desire€for€change€ofÐ ä4 Ðcustody,€the€two€older€sons€do€not,€and€we€find€no€error€in€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€of€fact€to€theÐ Ð  Ðeffect€that€all€three€sons€tend€to€say€favorable€things€about€each€parent.€€Ð ¼  Ѐ̀€€€€à  àThere€are€no€hard€and€fast€rules€for€determining€when€a€change€of€circumstances€will€beÐ ”ä Ðdeemed€material.€òòSee€Taylor€v.€Tayloróó,€849€S.W.2d€319,€327€(Tenn.€1993).€Generally,€a€materialÐ €Ð Ðchange€of€circumstances€to€support€a€decree€for€a€change€of€custody€must€involve€the€minorÐ l¼ Ðchildrenððs€circumstances,€not€the€circumstances€of€both€of€the€parents.€€A€change€must€be€mandatedÐ X ¨ Ðfrom€facts€or€circumstances€(1)€that€have€arisen€after€the€entry€of€the€custody€order€sought€to€beÐ D!” Ðchanged,€òòsee€Turner€v.€Turneróó,€776€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2d€88,€90€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989),€(2)€that€were€not€knownÐ 0"€  Ðor€reasonably€anticipated€when€the€underlying€decree€was€entered,€and€(3)€that€affects€the€childrenððsÐ #l! Ðwell€being€in€some€material€way.€òòSee€Dalton€v.€Daltonóó,€858€S.W.2d€324,€326€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).Ð $X" ÐÌ€€€€€à  àIn€child€custody€cases,€the€primary€concern€of€the€court€is€to€determine€what€custodialÐ à%0!$ Ðarrangement€will€be€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child.€òòSee€Malone€v.€Maloneóó,€842€S.W.2d€621€(Tenn.Ð Ì&"% ÐCt.€App.€1992).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌ€€€€€€à  àThe€court€does€not€find€any€error€in€the€trial€judgeððs€ruling€that€there€was€€not€a€sufficientÐ )à$( Ðchange€of€circumstances€to€warrant€a€change€of€sole€care,€custody€and€control€from€the€mother€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€father.€€€€Ð h+¸&* Ѐ€€€€€à  àThis€court€next€addresses€the€issue€of€whether€the€court€erred€in€not€granting€ð ðliberalÐ ° Ðvisitationðð€as€referred€to€in€the€original€1998€custody€and€visitation€order,€and€also€whether€the€courtÐ œì Ðerred€in€ordering€visitation€for€one€evening€when€the€original€decree€cited€that€the€appellant,€if€sheÐ ˆØ Ðreturned€to€Murfreesboro,€would€be€entitled€to€visitation€on€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekðð.€The€trialÐ tÄ Ðcourtððs€implemented€parenting€plan€defines€€ð ðevening€visitation€during€the€weekðð€to€allow€just€oneÐ `° Ðevening€during€the€week€(not€overnight).€Ð L œ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àOn€the€flip€side,€the€current€parenting€plan€provides€appellant€liberal€visitation€for€specificÐ $ t Ðperiods€during€holidays€and€summer€as€well€as€visitation€on€other€special€occasions.€ThroughÐ  ` Ðadditional€and€thoughtful€consideration€by€the€trial€judge,€appellantððs€overall€visitation€rights€haveÐ ü L  Ðactually€been€expanded€from€the€original€decree€and€the€first€parenting€plan,€the€latter€having€beenÐ è 8  Ðamended€twice.€Ð Ô$  ÐÌ€€€€€à  àNevertheless,€the€appellant€argues€that€ð ðliberal€visitationðð€was€meant€to€include€ð ðeveningsÐ ¬ü  Ðduring€the€week€visitationðð,€€ò òó óthat€this€provision€was€erroneously€modified€by€the€trial€judge€in€theÐ ˜è  Ðoriginal€parenting€plan€as€twice€amended,€and€thus€deprives€the€appellant€with€ð ðliberal€visitationððÐ „Ô  Ðrights€as€contemplated.Ð pÀ ÐÌ€€€€à  àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€trial€courtððs€interpretation€of€ð ðliberal€visitationðð€and€€ð ðeveningsÐ H˜ Ðduring€the€weekðð€are€compatible€and€reasonable.€While€the€courtððs€interpretation€of€ð ðevenings€duringÐ 4„ Ðthe€weekðð€is€narrower€than€appellant€wishes,€the€courtððs€ð ðhands€onðð€changes€in€specific€visitationÐ  p Ðto€the€benefit€of€the€appellant€is€equally€broad.Ð  \ Ѐ̀€€€€€€à  àThe€details€of€custody€and€visitation€with€the€children€are€particularly€within€the€broadÐ ä4 Ðdiscretion€of€the€trial€judge.€Accordingly,€a€trial€courtððs€decision€on€visitation€òòóówill€not€ordinarily€beÐ Ð  Ðreversed€absent€some€abuse€of€discretion.€òòÔ_ÔEldridgeÔ_Ô€v€Ô_ÔEldridgeÔ_Ôóó,€42€€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€3d€82,€87€(Tenn.€2001).Ð ¼  ÐÌ€€€€€à  àWe€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€and€recite€the€portion€of€the€trial€judgeððs€finding€of€factsÐ ”ä Ðstating€ð ð.€.€.€.€this€conclusion€that€the€minor€sons€should€have€academic€stability€that€may€not€beÐ €Ð Ðfostered€by€liberal€visitation€during€the€school€days.ðð€€This€is€the€obvious€matrix€for€the€courtÐ l¼ Ðrestricting€ð ðevenings€during€the€weekðð€and€it€is€reasonable.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌ€€€€€à  àLastly,€the€appellee€has€petitioned€this€court€for€attorneyððs€fees€for€the€legal€expensesÐ 0"€  Ðassociated€with€this€appeal€citing€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘—k#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€27„1„122,€arguing€that€this€appeal€is€€frivolous.€Ð #l! ÐAppellee€also€petitions€this€court€to€award€attorneyððs€fees€in€defending€the€interests€of€the€childrenÐ $X" Ðpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘ô€#ÔÔ‡XM‘XXXM‘Ô€36„5„103€Ô_Ô(cÔ_Ô).€The€court€has€considered€the€requested€attorneyððs€feesÐ ô$D # Ðand€declines€to€grant€a€fee.€However,€the€court€does€note€that€the€voluminous€record€in€this€caseÐ à%0!$ Ðappears€to€be€full€of€redundant€accusations,€needless€court€appearances€and€apparent€vexatiousnessÐ Ì&"% Ðon€both€of€the€parties€.€We€are€confident€that€the€trial€court€below€will€consider€awarding€attorneyððsÐ ¸'#& Ðfees€when€appropriate€in€the€future€as€a€result€of€needless€litigation.Ð ¤(ô#' Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àCONCLUSIONÐ ° ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€à  àWe€hold€that€the€trial€judge€did€not€err€in€denying€appellantððs€petition€for€change€of€€custodyÐ ˆØ Ðand€control€of€the€partiesðð€minor€children€and€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€inÐ tÄ Ðdenying€the€appellantððs€petition€for€increased€visitation.€Costs€are€taxed€to€the€appellant.Ô#†XM‘XXXM‘‚#ÔÐ `° ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àHAMILTON€V.€GAYDEN,€JR.Ð ü L  ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à