WPC? 'Jna,'bn]IT6P#Op j,6tz/U:ʻX㌶E8zOjv&R6b, rYd>4 6\Dz`̄9?{2--chJ20Gfq\鹥,6Z~Z=t^%IqGOkzGkkD<]]~%E/᥊"+@tvՊ/jWZEJi|:@C=xF rۈWUmLAgTDg K)^bAF%7< A4k]bqp|Th$rϔ|c6>BpoyA *]P [&̱llTej)\fu _&pO>Sﺡv TWppڸL}uhau?@;sU 2 M ˶hqvq ~c͖Xb#\ %% ^ + 07 UN w 4 z+  w  m 0U   F 0 N 0 0Eu 0w 00 0 0 07 0 0 0n 0! 0 0u 0 0 0F 0 0 0c 0 0 0a 0 0 0)!b! 0! 0m" 0+# 0># 0'$ 0% 0& 0& 0' 0( 0) 0C* 02+ 0G+ 0:C, 0Y}, 0_, 0 5- 0?. 0/ B*1 D/1 0 2 D/&4 0U4 06#5 0Y5 0:a6 0^6 0<6 1e57U67U>7U*8 1u88 08 72999 B;; 0; D5a< D-< 0K<< AS=a= 0'> 0D> A?\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK4,,,,0. (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular=.: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*+ (_2623  ..Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   &&& $_   x 23   x   - -0AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition T  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(hh&H1  5+ ` hp x 5      5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H2  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H3  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H4  5+ ` hp x 5 XXX 5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H5  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H6  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  2DD0Address  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKN<6X9`(Courier NewKSO\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard KN<6X9`(Courier NewKSO\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted  /%  ,Kk %#/KN<6X9`(Courier NewKSO\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/  <:zBottom of 7D(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?P%2A`Arial?  SO\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X75+ ` hp x 5  &  d dC)1dxd<:zTop of For7F(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?P%2A`Arial?  SO\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X75+ ` hp x 5  C)2dxd0KS.SampleKN<6X9`(Courier NewKSO\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKN<6X9`(Courier NewKSO\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB   !"# 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(|G2yp$ !.8dd8         0  Qi)  COATenn.R.App.P.Goddard P.J.SwineyCantrellT.C.A.Tenn.R.Civ.P. nunc tunc enforceabilityrecusingHarbourDonselaarElrodDenbowLantripestoppedCallisonPersadaVaccarellaTenn.App d(|3Ge$ !.8dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Ge$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8\iXXdd8  @ DINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#D #Ԉ &   May8,2003Session L X\iX #XX\i#REBECCAJANELEWv.IRAEUGENELEWX\iX  J @@ AppealfromtheChancery0 @ CourtforAndersonCounty  J @@No.00CH0098BillyJoeWhite,Chancellor  6 FILEDJULY31,_2003_    @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200201811COAR3CV   AV) ` dE<|` A }       Inthisdivorcecase,IraEugeneLew( Husband)appealstheTrialCourtsjudgment x  declaringthepartiesdivorcedonthegroundofirreconcilabledifferences,andapprovingand d incorporatingthepartiesmaritaldissolutionagreement( MDA)initsorder.Husbandarguesthat P theCourtwaswithoutpowertoenteritsjudgmentbecausehehadwithdrawnhisconsentand < agreementtotheMDApriortotheCourtsentryoffinaljudgment.TheTrialCourtfoundthat (x HusbandcouldnotwithdrawhisconsenttotheMDAbecause,asaconsequenceoftheunusual d proceduralpostureofthethiscase,thepartieshadalreadyexecuted,agreedto,andsignedtheMDA P andpresentedittotheTrialCourt,whichapproveditandincorporateditintoapreviousorder.We < affirmthejudgmentoftheTrialCourt. (   @  @ Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmed;Cause  Remanded     #X\id#X\iX.HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichCharlesD.Susano,Jr. t andD.MichaelSwiney,JJ.,joined. ` J.TerryHolland,Knoxville,fortheAppellant,IraEugeneLew 8!  DailR.Cantrell,Clinton,andMichaelL.Weathers,Florence,Alabama,fortheAppellee,Rebecca #`" JaneLew #L# O  OPINION #XX\i~ #X\iX %$!% #XX\i~ #  X\iX  RebeccaJaneLew( Wife)filedthiscauseofactionfordivorceonJanuary24,2000.She '"' requestedtheCourttograntheradivorceonthegroundofirreconcilabledifferences.Husband (#( answered,admittingthatirreconcilabledifferenceshadarisenbetweentheparties,andalsoasked )$) foradivorceuponthatbasis.ThecasewasassignedtoChancellorWilliamE.Lantripofthe p*%* AndersonCountyChanceryCourt. \+&+   H,', _  OnSeptember1,2000,theMDAatissuewasfiledwiththeCourt.Onthatsamedate,apair   ofordersstyled ConsentOrderand FinalDecreeofDivorcewereenteredbyChancellorLantrip.  TheConsentOrderstatesinitsentiretyasfollows:  8  8`   PursuanttoParagraphNo.12oftheMaritalDissolutionAgreement ` asexecutedbythepartiesinthiscauseofaction,theparties L  specificallyagreetobeboundbytheterms,articlesandconditionsof 8  theMaritalDissolutionAgreementasexecutedbythepartiesinthis $ t causeofaction,andasfiledinthiscauseofaction,itis,  ` THEREFORE,ORDERED,ADJUDGEDANDDECREEDas  L  follows: 8 ` x` x 8  8`    1.ThatpursuanttoParagraphNo.12oftheMarital $  DissolutionAgreementasenteredintoandfiledbythepartiesinthis   causeofaction,theterms,articlesandconditionsofthatMarital   DissolutionAgreementdohereandnowbecomeanorderofthis   Court. ` x` x ChancellorLantripsFinalDecreeofDivorcestatesinrelevantpart: \ 8  8`   ThiscausecametobeheardupontheoriginalPetitionforDivorce 4 filed,theMaritalDissolutionAgreementoftheparties,theConsent  p Decreeoftheparties,therepresentationofbothpartiesbycounsel,  \ theWaiverofanEntryofaJudgmentbyDefault,andfilingofan H AnswerbytheRespondentasisevidencedbythisexecutionofthe 4 MaritalDissolutionAgreement,theQualifiedDomesticRelations   Order,theAgreementsoftheparties,fromallofwhichtheCourt   findsthepartiesareentitledtoanabsolutedivorceonthegroundsof  irreconcilabledifferences;thattherearenominorchildrenfromthe  marriage;thattheMaritalDissolutionAgreementasitrelatestothe  distributionofassetsandliabilitiesisherebydeemedequitableand l fairandincorporatedintotheFinalDecreeofDivorcebyreferenceas X  thoughspecificallysetoutverbatim[.]D!` x` x OnSeptember11,2000,ChancellorLantripenteredanorderwhichstatesthefollowinginrelevant #l! part: $X" 8  8`   Thiscausecameontobehearduponthejointmotionoftheparties %0!$ hereintosetasidetheFinalDecreeofDivorceenteredinthiscause &"% ofactiononSeptember1,2000,asthepartieshavelearnedthatupon '#& thedivorcebecomingfinal,the[Wife]wouldnotbecoveredwith (#' healthinsuranceunderCOBRAbecausetheydonothaveagroup )$( policy,andthereisaspecificneedforhertobecoveredatthistime; |*%) assuch,thepartiesmovethatthiscauseofactionbesetasideandthat h+&* anorderofreconciliationbegrantedforaperiodofoneyear,andin  theeventthepartiescannotreconcilewithinthatoneyear,thenthe  partiesshallbegrantedanabsolutedivorceonthebasisoftheMarital  DissolutionAgreementheretoforeexecutedbytheparties,including t theQualifiedDomesticRelationsOrder,subjecttoincreasedvalue; ` andL ` x` x 8  8`    Itis,therefore,ORDERED,ADJUDGEDandDECREEDas 8  follows:$ t` x` x 8  8`    1.Thatthedivorcegranting[Wife]and[Husband]a  ` terminationoftheirmarriageonirreconcilabledifferencesthatwas  L  enteredonSeptember1,2000,isherebywithdrawn. 8 ` x` x 8  8`    2.ThatinaccordancewithT.C.A.364126,allproceedings $  inthiscauseofactionareherebysuspendedforaperiodofoneyear,   withoutprejudice,andduringthisperiodofsuspensiontheparties   mayresumeactivitiesashusbandandwife... ` x` x 8  8`    3.Thatintheeventthepartiescannotreconcilewithinthis   oneyearperiodoftime,adivorceshouldbegrantedandtheparties p shallbeboundbythetermsoftheMaritalDissolutionAgreementand \ QualifiedDomesticRelationsOrder,subjecttoincreasedor H decreasedvalues.4` x` x   OnMay22,2001,Husbandfiledamotion torevokeorderofreconciliationandreinstate  \ divorceproceedingsinwhichhealleged,interalia,that hisagreementtothecontentoftheMarital H DissolutionAgreement,andhissignaturethereon,indicatinghisassenttothatagreement,was 4 accomplishedthroughfraud,duress,undueinfluenceandothermisconductonbehalfon[Wife].   HusbandmovedthattheFinalDecreeofDivorcebesetasidepursuanttoTenn.R.Civ.P.60.02.     OnSeptember13,2001,ChancellorLantripenteredanorderwhichhemadenuncprotunc  toAugust31,2001,whichstatesasfollowsinrelevantpart:  8  8`   1.Paragraphthree(3)ofthe OrderSettingAsideFinalDecreeof X  DivorceandOrderofReconciliationenteredonSeptember11,2000, D! issetasidetotheextentthatitsprovisionsareautomatic,andthis 0"  causeissetonforahearingontheenforceabilityoftheFinal #l! JudgmentandConsentDecreepreviouslyenteredinthiscause.$X"` x` x 8  8`    ` x` x 8  8`   2.InitsdeterminationofwhetherthetermsoftheConsentDecree %0!$ andFinalJudgmentshouldbebindingontheparties,the[Husband] &"% shallhavetherighttoraiseasadefensetotheenforcementofsuch '#& terms,allofthereasonslistedinRule60.02oftheTennesseeRules (#' ofCivilProcedure.)$(` x` x  8  8`   |*%)` x` x 8  8`   3.TheMotiontoQuashSubpoenaisdenied,andthe[Husband]isat   libertytodevelophisdefensestotheenforceabilityoftheConsent  DecreeandFinalJudgment.However,discoveryshallbelimitedto  theseissues.t` x` x   OnSeptember6,2001,ChancellorLantripenteredanorderrecusinghimselffromthecase L  anddesignatingChancellorBillyJoeWhitetohearand trythiscasetoitsconclusion.Aftera 8  hearingonMay9,2002,ChancellorWhiteruledasfollows: $ t 8  8`   ThatthepartiesaredivorcedonthebasisofIrreconcilable  L  DifferencesandthepreviouslyexecutedMaritalDissolution  8  Agreement...ThatthedateofthedivorceshallbeMay9,2002,the $  Courtfindingthatthe[Husband]couldnotwithdrawhisprevious   agreementtotheMaritalDissolutionAgreementexecutedonorabout   August26,2000,whichagreementtheCourtfindstobetheMarital   DissolutionAgreementofthepartiesherein. ` x` x Fivedaysafterthiswrittenorderwasfiled,theCourtgrantedWifesmotiontoalteroramendthe \ order,makingfurtherfindingsasfollows: H 8  8`   ThatthesaidOrder/FinalDecreeofDivorceenteredbythisCourton  p July17,2002,isherebyamendedtoalsoprovideasfollows: \` x` x 8  8`    ThisCourtaffirmativelyfindsthatthewrittenagreementof H thepartiesinthiscase,theMaritalDissolutionAgreementofthe 4 partiesinthiscase,makesadequateandsufficientprovisionforthe   equitableandfairsettlementofanyandallpropertyrightsbetween   thepartiesinthiscaseandthattheMaritalDissolutionAgreementas  itrelatestothedistributionoftheassetsandliabilitiesishereby  deemedequitableandfairandthatthesaidMaritalDissolution  Agreementofthepartiesisherebyincorporatedbyreferenceintothe l Order/FinalDecreeofDivorceenteredbythisCourtonJuly17,2002 X  asthoughspecificallysetoutverbatim.D!` x` x   Onappeal,Husbandraisestheissue,whichwerestate,ofwhethertheChancellorhadthe #l! authoritytoenteravaliddivorcejudgmentonirreconcilabledifferencesgrounds,andtoenforcethe $X" MDA,underthecircumstancesofthiscaseasoutlinedabove.Thisissuecausesustofocusonthe $D # provisionsofT.C.A.364103,whichstatesinrelevantpartasfollows: %0!$ 8  8`   (b)Nodivorceshallbegrantedonthegroundofirreconcilable '#& differencesunlessthecourtaffirmativelyfindsinitsdecreethatthe (#' partieshavemadeadequateandsufficientprovisionbywritten )$(  agreementforthecustodyandmaintenanceofanychildrenofthat |*%) marriageandfortheequitablesettlementofanypropertyrights  betweentheparties.8h` x` xhphp     `    *0 h 0h(#h(#*0(#(#0p(#(#*p(#p(# 8  8`   (e)Iftherehasbeenacontestordenialofthegroundsof t irreconcilabledifferences,nodivorceshallbegrantedonthegrounds ` ofirreconcilabledifferences.However,adivorcemaybegrantedon L  thegroundsofirreconcilabledifferenceswheretherehasbeena 8  contestordenial,ifaproperlyexecutedmaritaldissolutionagreement $ t ispresentedtothecourt. `` x` x HusbandarguesthatT.C.A.364103(b)requiresthatanMDAcontainarecitationthat the  8  Agreementisfairandequitableinordertobevalid.Wefindnosuchstatutoryrequirement;itis $  onlyrequiredthattheCourtmakeafinding thatthepartieshavemadeadequateandsufficient   provisionbywrittenagreementforthecustodyandmaintenanceofanychildrenofthatmarriageand   fortheequitablesettlementofanypropertyrightsbetweentheparties.Wenotethatsuchan   affirmativefindingwasmadeinthiscasebybothChancellorLantripandChancellorWhite.     HusbandnextarguesthattheSupremeCourtsdecisioninHarbourv.BrownforUlrich,732 \ S.W.2d598(Tenn.1987)requiresreversaloftheTrialCourtsdecision.TheHarbourCourtstated H thefollowing: 4 8  8`   Theresolutionofdisputesbyagreementofthepartiesistobe  \ encouraged.Butavalidconsentjudgmentcannotbeenteredbya H courtwhenonepartywithdrawshisconsentandthisfactis 4 communicatedtothecourtpriortoentryofthejudgment. @  ` x` x 8  8`      *0h` x` x0hxhx*0xx0pxx* pxpx 8  8`   Thereasonfortheruleisthataconsentjudgmentdoesnotrepresent  thereasoneddecisionofthecourtbutismerelytheagreementofthe  parties,madeamatterofrecordbythecourt.VanDonselaarv.Van  Donselaar,249Iowa504,87N.W.2d311(1958).And,untilentered l bythecourt,thematterbeingthequestionofanagreementbetween X  theparties,eitherpartymayrepudiatetheagreementbecauseofan D! actualorsupposeddefensetotheagreement.Thisisnottosaythat 0"  thecompromiseagreementmaynotbeabindingcontract,subjectto #l! beingenforcedasothercontracts,butonlythatthecourtmaynot $X" enterjudgmentbasedonthecompromiseagreement,whenithas $D # noticethatoneofthepartiesisnolongerconsentingtotheagreement %0!$ forwhateverreason.&"%` x` x Harbour,732S.W.2dat599600(emphasisadded).SubsequentdecisionsofthisCourthave (#' followedandappliedtheHarbourrule.Elrodv.Elrod,anunpublishedopinionofthisCourtfiled )$( inKnoxvilleonNovember18,1991;Denbowv.Denbow,anunpublishedopinionofthisCourtfiled |*%) inJacksononMay9,1996.Thesecasesinvolvedsituationswhereconsentwaswithdrawnprior_to h+&* entryofthejudgment,andwheretheCourtwasfullyawarethattherewasnolongeragreement  betweenthepartiesbeforeentryofaconsentjudgment.    Inthepresentcase,atthetimeofentryofChancellorLantripsconsentorderanddecreeof t divorce,therehadbeennowithdrawnconsentbyHusband,whosignedtheconsentorderstatingthat `  theterms,articlesandconditionsof[theMDA]dohereandnowbecomeanorderofthisCourt. L  Asregards_Chanceollor_ԀLantripsorderwhichsetasidehisfinaldecreeofdivorce,thereappearsno 8  otherreasonforthatorderthantheoneitsetsforth,i.e., SWifesneedtobecoveredbyahealth $ t insurancepolicy.Husbandalsosignedthatorder,whichstatesthat intheeventthepartiescannot  ` reconcilewithinthisoneyearperiodoftime,adivorceshouldbegrantedandthepartiesshallbe  L  boundbythetermsoftheMaritalDissolutionAgreement[.]  8    ItwasnotuntilMay22,2001,nearlyninemonthsafterheexecutedtheMDA,whichwas f  subsequentlyfoundfairandequitablebyChancellorLantripsdivorcedecree,thatHusband R  indicatedhisdissatisfactionwiththetermsoftheMDA.Underthesecircumstances,neitherthe >  holdingofHarbournoritsrationaleisapplicabletothiscase.AccordSuttonv.Sutton,an *z unpublishedopinionofthisCourtfiledinKnoxvilleonMarch31,1994( ThisCourthaslongheld f thatwhenpartiesenterintoaseparationagreementthatbothpartiesareestoppedfromcontesting R itsvalidityintheabsenceofaclearshowingoffraud.);Callisonv.Callison,anunpublished > opinionofthisCourtfiledinKnoxvilleonSeptember29,1988;Persadav.Persada,anunpublished * opinionofthisCourtfiledinKnoxvilleonNovember22,2002( Itisequallyclear,however,that  ifthetermsofthesettlementhadbeenannouncedtothecourtandapprovedbeforeconsentwas  withdrawn,thentheJudgmententeredthereonisvalid.);cf.Vaccarellav.Vaccarella,49S.W.3d  307(Tenn.App.2001).    AtahearingbeforeChancellorWhite,Husbandabandonedandeffectivelywithdrewhis X Tenn.R.Civ.P.60.02motionandthusitisnotbeforeusinthisappeal. D   Asnotedabove,T.C.A.364103(e)providesthat adivorcemaybegrantedonthegrounds r  ofirreconcilabledifferenceswheretherehasbeenacontestordenial,ifaproperlyexecutedmarital ^! dissolutionagreementispresentedtothecourt.WefindthattheTrialCourtdidproperlyexercise J" itsauthorityingrantingthepartiesanirreconcilabledifferencesdivorce.Wefindnoerrorin 6# ChancellorWhitesrulingthattheMDAinthiscaseisvalidandenforceable. "$r    FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtisaffirmedandthecauseremanded &!" forcollectionofcostsbelow.CostsofappealareadjudgedagainsttheAppellant,IraEugeneLew. '"#    M !"#(03Q S   `     h   _________________________________________ *%&    `     h   HOUSTONM.GODDARD,PRESIDINGJUDGE