WPC} 2;`8Ω|GHo0;H_ߙ$sG m{-"t5\dz) 9[Om6ÛH#hqhb4!=皪mgSZG?"[^u< 2oՉ \ f{? wxkCxs+3K^8SW%T E޷+6d|Y}5'0]T<,EoE崞XEboy؞$IYP^x;wJp_[oҮe7]wxCl0{qW.-8BDa.Uh[(29+pBYdZt9ZL2ʉKuX=2]bu?⟙ oY6Y%"cAs,7ʼngd۸"gb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m UN  &   x #> N 1 72E 1u 721 0 cc 1 72M 0D.................brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 0zzzz Bee 0 D3& D-Y 0K AS$ 0 0D A ) (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularOo)ؗ3|x 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.wptU(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5HP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (EhCEKQW]cioAutoList2I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. R$      1   U    _ԀAfterdeterminationbytheReferee.(#$  0  - -(|G2$ !.8d d 8         0  r d(|3$ !.8d d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8d d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.84d d8     _    8dXXdd 8  @   INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#   #Ԉ &   August7,2000Session L  XcX  # X Xc#SHARONS._SARLI_ԀKELLYv.GEORGELEROYEVANS,III XcX   J @@ AppealfromtheJuvenileCourtforSullivanCounty  J @@No.J20687StevenH.Jones,Judge  6 FILEDDECEMBER27,2000    @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E199900417_COA_ԄR3CV   AV) ` dE<|` A }     ThisisasuitinitiatedbySharonS._Sarli_Ԁ(nowKelly)againstGeorgeLeroyEvans,III,whereinshe x  soughtadeterminationthathewasthefatherofherchild.AfterMr.Evansstipulatedthathewas d indeedthefatherofthechild,theRefereeandtheJuvenileJudgemadevariousdeterminations P relativetocustody,childsupportandthelike.Mrs.Kelly,beingdissatisfiedwithanumberofthe < determinationsintheRefereeslastorderwhichonappealwasinthemainaffirmedbytheJuvenile (x Judge,filedthisappeal.WevacatethejudgmentoftheJuvenileCourtandremandthecasefor d furtherproceedings. P # X Xc# XcX  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheJuvenileCourtVacated;  CauseRemanded     #  Xc# XcX. HoustonM._Goddard_,_P.J._,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichHerschelP.Franksand  D.Michael_Swiney_,JJ.,joined. t JohnP.Chiles,Kingsport,Tennessee,andThomasF.Bloom,Nashville,Tennessee,forAppellant L  SharonS._Sarli_ԀKelly 8!  DavidW._Blankenship_,Kingsport,Tennessee,forAppelleeGeorgeLeroyEvans,III #`"  OPINION # X Xc# XcX  &"& # X Xc # XcX     SharonS._Sarli_Ԁ(nowKelly),PetitionerAppellant,appealsajudgmentoftheJuvenileCourt (#( forSullivanCounty,whereintheTrialJudgeenteredanorderwhichessentiallyaffirmedallthe )$) determinationsoftheReferee,whoseorderwasappealedtotheJuvenileCourt. p*%* # X Xc #  \+&+ _ XcX   _Mrs.Kelly_Ԁraisesthefollowingfiveissues:  0  I. WHETHERTHEREFEREEERREDINALLOWINGFATHERTO  ASSERTCLAIMSFORRELIEFWITHOUTGIVINGMOTHER  NOTICEOFTHOSECLAIMSPRIORTOTRIAL.r  X X   (5h83! !0  II. WHETHERTHEJUVENILECOURTERREDBYFAILINGTO J  GRANTMOTHERAFULL,EVIDENTIARYHEARINGONTHE 6  ISSUESPRESENTED." r  X X   (Eh88! !"3"  32Eh  III  .3  0   WHETHERTHELOWERCOURTSABUSEDTHEIRDISCRETION J  INSETTINGTHEVISITATIONSCHEDULE.3݌6  X X  Ќ  "3"  32Eh  IV  .3  0   ASSUMINGTHATTHISCOURTREVERSESTHEJUDGMENTOF   THELOWERCOURTSANDADOPTSMOTHERSPROPOSED   VISITATIONSCHEDULE,WHETHERFATHERSHOULDBE  ORDEREDTOPAYCHILDSUPPORTINACCORDANCEWITHTHE  CHILDSUPPORTGUIDELINES.3݌n X X  Ќ  "3"  32Eh  V  .3  0   INTHEALTERNATIVE,WHETHERTHETRIALCOURTABUSED F ITSDISCRETIONINMAINTAININGA20%DEVIATIONFROMTHE 2 CHILDSUPPORTGUIDELINESWHENFATHERSSALARYHAS n INCREASEDBY$7,000ANDWHERETHEVISITATION  Z SCHEDULE,ASMODIFIEDBYTHECOURT,REDUCESFATHERS F VISITATIONTOTHERANGEASSUMEDBYTHECHILDSUPPORT 2 GUIDELINES.3 ݌ X X  Ќ    Ourreadingoftherecordandthebriefsfiledbythepartiespersuadesusthatissuetwois  _dispositive_Ԁofthisappeal.     ` _T.C.A._Ԁ371107(e),relativetoappealsofarefereesdecision,providesthefollowing: j! Ҁ(e)Anypartymay,withinfive(5)daysthereafter, #  1      ׀excluding_nonjudicial_Ԁdays, B#! filearequestwiththecourtforahearingbythejudgeofthejuvenilecourt.The .$~" judgemay,onthejudgesownmotion,orderarehearingofanymatterheard %j # beforeareferee,andshallallowahearingifarequestforsuchhearingisfiledas &V!$ hereinprescribed.Unlessthejudgeordersotherwise,therecommendationofthe &B"% refereeshallbethedecreeofthecourtpendingarehearing. '.#&   ($'   InthiscasetheJuvenileJudge,onhisownvolition,determinedtohearthematteronthe   recordmadeatthehearingbeforetheReferee.Thus,thequestionispresentedwhethertheStatute  contemplatesatraditionalhearingdenovoasinanappealfromageneralsessionscourttoacircuit  court,oradenovohearingbasedupontherecordofthehearingbeforetheReferee. t   Wehavenotfoundacasedirectlyonpoint,butitseemstousthatthelanguageintheStatute, L   shallallowahearingcontemplatesatraditionaldenovohearing.Ourconvictioninthisregardis 8  buttressedbythecasesofJarrettv._Starkey_,1998WL202491(_Tenn.Ct.App_.)and_Hickerson_Ԁv. $ t _Finchum_,1997WL21189(_Tenn.Ct.App_.),wherein,althoughtheissuewasnotspecificallyraised,  ` itisclearthatwitnessestestifiedbeforethejuvenilecourtonappeal.  L    OurdispositionofissuetworendersmoottheotherissuesraisedbyMrs.Kelly. $    FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheJuvenileCourtisvacatedandthecause   remandedforadenovotrialinthatCourt.CostsofappealareadjudgedagainstMr.Evans.   0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#_________________________________________H(#(#    `     h   HOUSTONM._GODDARD_,PRESIDINGJUDGE 4