ÿWPC‚ 6# UN %] 0(cw@‹4Ëß {YîG 0lO 0D»ÿU@ÿe? 0D@ 0J„ÆÎ 0T” 0^è AQF 0D— 0hÛ 0rC 0|µ 0†1 0· 1uG 0d¼ B 0@= D3} D/° Bß U>ü B): DCc AM¦ U*ó Ý7úv~1vÓ¯˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ^E_`EabDcDdeDfÓ€g Ks!3|xg(1Úð$¡¡Ô€ÅøÚÅXXÔÓ®¾Ó((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ɸ·`(ZapfCalligr BTTT(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  ÔƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$(Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò""""'ÿÿdxd**'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd$/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ÓÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  Ýò òÔ€-ÔÓ  ÓÔ€1ÔÔ eee ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔó óÌò òÔ€1¼ÔÔ"USú ú, úÔÔ ƒ ÔÔ!  Ôó óÔ€1XÔÌÌò òCecil€Crowson,€Jr.Ô€Ôó óÔ  ÔÌÔ€ÂÔÔ€1ÔÔ eee Ôò òAppellate€Court€Clerkó óÔ  ÔÔ€ÔÔ€XÔ -Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€its€Final€Order€on€Motion€for€Contempt,€the€trial€court€indicated€a€willingness€toÏconsider€Husbandððs€motion€for€a€reduction€in€alimony.€€Therefore,€the€trial€court€has€not€yet€issuedÏan€order€on€reduction€of€alimony€and€the€only€issue€properly€before€this€Court€involves€HusbandððsÏcontempt€for€not€paying€the€arrearage€owed€Ex„Wife.€€Accordingly›,€we€do€not€address€the€issue€ofÏreduction€in€alimony.€ÌPtPtfHHÚ(ÿáÿáùE1À˜ýHHŽxЀxh'dHStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\Ñò òÙ€ÙÙ€ÙÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€02/A1-j|dâ `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌà@ àò òWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌóóÌÌBRENDA€BAILEY€LOYD,€€€€€à àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àó óPlaintiff/Appellant,ò òà àà àà à)à àó óMadison€County€Chancery€No.€41548Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌWENDELL€RAY€LOYD,€€€à àà à€€€€€€€€€€€à à)à àó óAppeal€No.€02A01„9504„CH„00084ò òÌ€€à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìó óà àDefendant/Appellee.€à àà àò òà à)à àÌòòó óÌò òóóÌ€€€ÌÌÌà@ àó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€MADISON€COUNTY€CHANCERY€COURT€Ìà@ àAT€JACKSON,€TENNESSEE€€€€ÌÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€JOE€C.€MORRIS,€CHANCELLORÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/Appellantóó:òòà àà àà àFor€the€Defendant/Appelleeóó:òòÌóóÌMary€Jo€Middlebrooksà àà àà àWendell€Ray€Loyd,€Pro€SeÌJackson,€Tennessee€€à àà àà àà àJackson,€Tennessee€€Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌò òÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àREVERSED€AND€REMANDED€ÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ò òÇØØÙ  ÙÑ7€ÛXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓà@ àOPINIONó ớ̜à àThis€case€involves€contempt€proceedings€brought€against€Wendell€Ray€Loyd€(ð ðHusbandðð)Ïby€Brenda€Bailey€Loyd€(ð ðEx„Wifeðð)€for€failure€to€pay€alimony.€€The€trial€court€found€that€HusbandÏdid€not€have€the€present€ability€to€pay€and€therefore€could€not€be€incarcerated€for€contempt.€€WeÏreverse€and€remand€for€further€proceedings.Ìà àHusband€and€Ex„Wife€were€divorced€in€1991.€€In€its€Final€Decree,€the€trial€court€did€notÏaward€alimony€to€Ex„Wife.€€Instead,€the€court€awarded€her€Loydððs€Telephone,€Inc.,€the€telephoneÏsales€and€installation€business€that€she€and€Husband€had€run,€which€the€court€valued€at€the€time€atÏ$287,884.€€It€awarded€Husband€the€marital€residence,€a€car,€some€shop€equipment,€and€two€IRAððsÏworth€$11,301.96€each.€€The€court€also€ordered€the€parties€to€equally€divide€their€furniture€andÏappliances€and€to€each€pay€his€own€attorneyððs€fees.Ìà àEx„Wife€appealed€to€this€Court€the€division€of€property€and€the€failure€to€award€herÏalimony€and€attorneyððs€fees.€€òòò òLoyd€v.€Loydó óóó,€860€S.W.2d€409,€410€(Tenn.€App.€1993).€€SheÏmaintained€that€she€lacked€the€technical€experience€to€successfully€run€the€business.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€412.€ÏEx„Wife€also€alleged€that€Husband€had€drained€the€business€of€its€value,€formed€a€new€telephoneÏsales€and€installation€business,€gone€into€direct€competition€with€her,€stolen€customers,€and€notÏcooperated€in€transferring€to€her€the€assets€of€Loydððs€Telephone,€Inc.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€410„11.Ìà àThis€Court€found€in€favor€of€Ex„Wife.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€412„13.€€The€business€was€awarded€toÏHusband,€as€well€as€the€shop€equipment€and€the€car.€€Ex„Wife€was€awarded€the€marital€residence,Ïboth€of€the€IRAððs€(or€their€cash€equivalent€in€the€eventuality€that€Husband€had€liquidated€them),Ïand€$99,000,€as€an€equitable€distribution€of€the€marital€estate.€€Husband€was€ordered€to€pay€theÏ$99,000€awarded€to€Ex„Wife€in€monthly€installments€of€$412.50€per€month.€€The€payments€wereÏto€begin€on€May€1,€1993,€and€continue€for€either€twenty€years€or€until€Ex„Wifeððs€death,€whicheverÏoccurred€first.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€412.€€In€addition,€Ex„Wife€was€awarded€$1,000€per€month€in€alimony,€theÏpayments€to€begin€May€1,€1993,€and€continue€until€her€death€or€remarriage.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€413.Ìà àSubsequently,€Husband€filed€a€motion€asking€the€trial€court€to€suspend€or€reduce€alimony.€ÍOne€of€the€supporting€reasons€for€the€motion€was€that€Husbandððs€physical€problems€had€resultedÏin€a€reduced€income,€adversely€affecting€his€ability€to€pay€alimony.€€In€response,€Ex„Wife€filed€aÏmotion€for€contempt,€alleging€that€Husband€had€failed€to€make€any€of€the€ordered€monthlyÏpayments,€had€failed€to€surrender€the€IRA€in€his€possession€(Ex„Wife€already€had€possession€ofÏthe€other€IRA),€had€failed€to€surrender€the€marital€residence,€had€stripped€the€marital€residence€ofÏfixtures€and€otherwise€vandalized€it,€had€failed€to€pay€real€estate€taxes€on€the€marital€residenceÏduring€the€time€in€which€he€inhabited€it,€and€had€failed€to€pay€a€note€owed€by€Loydððs€Telephone,ÏInc.,€to€First€American€Bank.€€Ex„Wife€also€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€Husbandððs€petition€to€reduceÏor€suspend€alimony,€arguing€that€Husband€was€in€contempt€and€that€his€motion€should€not€beÏheard€until€he€had€purged€himself€of€contempt.€€Ìà àAt€the€hearing€on€the€partiesðð€motions,€Ex„Wife€testified€in€support€of€the€allegations€in€herÏcontempt€motion.€€Husband€testified€that€he€had€not€yet€received€from€Ex„Wife€all€of€the€assets€ofÏLoydððs€Telephone,€Inc.,€and€that€the€marital€furniture€had€not€yet€been€equitably€divided.€€He€alsoÏtestified€that€he€had€remarried.€€His€new€wife,€Kitty€Loyd€(ð ðWifeðð),€had€bought€a€house€for€theÏtwo€of€them,€making€the€down€payment€out€of€her€own€money.€€The€house€had€been€placed€solelyÏin€Wifeððs€name,€and€Husband€testified€that€this€was€done€ð ð[b]ecause€I€didnððt€want€Brenda€[Ex„Wife]€to€get€it.ðð€€Husband€also€testified€that€he€had€previously€cashed€the€IRA€in€his€possession€inÏorder€to€pay€accountantððs€and€attorneyððs€fees.€€Since€the€divorce,€Husbandððs€new€business,ÏModern€Telephone€Systems,€had€purchased€two€vehicles,€a€van€and€€a€new€Ford€Taurus.€€He€andÏWife€both€drove€the€Ford€Taurus.€€Husband€claimed€that€his€income€had€declined€because€he€hadÏbeen€having€trouble€with€his€back€and€knees,€that€he€had€been€unable€to€pay€alimony€as€a€result,Ïand€that€he€was€willing€to€work€out€a€payment€plan€if€the€court€would€allow€it.Ìà àAfter€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€wrote€a€letter€to€the€partiesðð€attorneys.€€In€the€letter,€the€trialÏjudge€informed€the€parties€that€Husband€would€have€to€be€brought€current€on€the€obligationsÏordered€by€the€Court€of€Appeals€before€his€motion€to€reduce€alimony€would€be€considered.€Ìà àSeveral€months€later,€Ex„Wife€filed€another€motion€asking€the€trial€court€to€find€Husband€inÍcontempt.€€The€motion€stated€that€Husband€had€still€failed€to€make€any€of€the€required€payments.€ÏEx„Wife€alleged€that€Husband€had€still€not€paid€anything€towards€the€amount€of€the€IRA€that€heÏhad€cashed,€that€he€€had€not€paid€any€of€the€delinquent€taxes,€and€that€the€note€on€LoydððsÏTelephone€had€not€been€satisfied.€€Although€Husband€had€given€Ex„Wife€possession€of€the€maritalÏresidence,€Ex„Wife€stated€that€drapes€and€window€shutters€had€been€removed;€built„in€appliances,Ïlight€fixtures,€and€built„in€cabinets€were€removed;€the€central€heat€and€air€unit€had€been€removedÏand€replaced€with€œÌÌÌan›€inoperable€unit€that€could€not€be€repaired;€there€was€interior€damage€to€the€house;€and€variousÏpersonal€items€belonging€to€Ex„Wife€were€missing.€€Ìà àAt€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€contempt,€Husband€testified€that€in€September€of€1993€heÏœhad€had›€surgery€on€his€knees€and€had€been€at€home€recovering€for€approximately€eight€weeks,Ïduring€which€time€he€had€been€able€to€do€very€little€work.€€Husband€claimed€that€he€suffered€fromÏarthritis€in€both€his€knees€and€hands.€€There€was€no€medical€documentation€or€other€support€ofÏHusbandððs€alleged€medical€problems€admitted€as€evidence€€at€the€hearing.€€Husband€also€testifiedÏthat€he€was€the€only€salesperson€for€his€company€and€that€the€pain€in€his€knees,€which€hadÏcontinued€despite€the€surgery,€made€it€difficult€for€him€to€make€service€calls.€€Consequently,€hisÏpersonal€income€had€decreased€dramatically,€as€had€the€earnings€of€his€business,€ModernÏTelephone€Systems.€€€However,€when€asked€on€cross„examination€why€he€had€made€no€attemptsÏto€pay€alimony€prior€to€the€onset€of€€his€medical€problems,€Husband€said€only,€ð ðI€canððt€explain€it.ððÌÓÓà àÓÓHusband€testified€that€he€had€two€employees,€besides€œWife,›€to€install€telephone€equipmentÏand€handle€related€work.€€He€also€testified€that€he€could€drive€around€town,€that€he€could€makeÏsales€calls,€and€that€the€surgery€on€his€knees€had€been€an€arthroscopic€procedure.€€Husband€statedÏthat€Wife€owned€half€of€€Modern€Telephone€Systems€and€that€she€earned€$250€a€week€from€theÏcompany€œfor›€bookkeeping,€driving€Husband€on€out„of„town€assignments,€and€otherwise€being€ofÍgeneral€assistance,€all€while€additionally€employed€elsewhere.Ìà àEx„Wife€testified€that€she€had€seen€Husband€driving€around€town€in€the€company€van.€€SheÏalso€œtestified€that,€though›€Husband€had€been€limping€in€the€courtroom,€œshe›€had€seen€him€walkingÏinto€the€post€office€the€previous€day€without€a€limp.Ìà àThe€trial€court€found€Husband€in€contempt.€€The€court€found€him€in€arrears€for€a€period€ofÏten€months€for€the€total€sum€of€$14,125€($1,000€per€month€in€alimony€plus€$412.50€per€month€inÏpayments€representing€the€division€of€marital€property).€€The€court€ordered€Husband€to€pay€theÏarrearage€by€a€date€certain€or€work€out€an€acceptable€€payment€plan€with€Ex„Wife.€€If€he€failed€toÏdo€so€he€would€be€placed€in€the€county€workhouse€until€he€had€purged€himself€of€contempt.€ÏHusband€failed€to€pay€the€arrearage€or€offer€any€payment€plan€and€was€subsequently€incarcerated.̜Ǜà àAfter€having€served€a€little€over€two€months€in€the€county€workhouse,€Husband€moved€forÏa€stay€of€the€courtððs€judgment.€€The€trial€court€released€him€on€his€own€recognizance€on€April€15,Ï1994,€pending€further€proceedings.€€A€hearing€ensued€on€October€4,€1994.Ìà àAt€this€hearing,€Husband€presented€the€expert€testimony€of€his€accountant,€Rex€BakerÏ(ð ðBakerðð).€€Baker€had€prepared€a€compiled€financial€statement€for€the€first€eight€months€of€1994Ïfor€Wendell€Loyd€Enterprises,€Inc.,€d/b/a€Modern€Telephone€Systems.€€According€to€Baker,€theÏbusiness€showed€a€profit€of€$1,113€for€the€first€eight€months,€but€due€to€prior€yearsðð€losses,€theÏstockholder€equity€was€at€a€deficit€of€over€$7,000.€€Baker€also€presented€the€corporationððs€taxÏreturns€for€1993€and€testified€that€they€revealed€that€Husband€and€Wife€had€been€paid€a€total€ofÏ$33,024€in€salaries€during€1993.Ìà àHusband€testified€that€he€still€suffered€pain€in€his€knees€and€his€back€and€was€unable€to€€doÏthe€physical€work€demanded€by€service€calls€at€his€business.€€He€claimed€that€he€had€undergone€aÏheart€catheterization€and€had€tried€to€slow€down€since€then€to€keep€his€stress€levels€low.€€HeÏtestified€further€that€he€injured€his€left€hand€in€a€table€saw€accident.€€Husband€offered€no€medicalÏrecords€or€other€evidence€to€substantiate€these€claims.Ìà àHusband€testified€that€he€valued€his€business€at€$55,000€to€$60,000.€€He€stated€that€he€hadÏgiven€Wife€50%€of€the€company€stock€in€exchange€for€a€used€car€worth€approximately€$2,000.€ÏHe€admitted€that€Wife€drew€a€salary€while€employed€at€two€other€jobs€but€explained€that€both€ofÏher€other€jobs€were€part„time.€€Husband€stated€that,€as€of€the€date€of€the€hearing,€Wife€wasÏworking€solely€for€Modern€Telephone€Systems.€€œHe€›€testified€that€he€had€recently€brought€aÏcompetitor,€Aaron€Gilbertson€(ð ðGilbertsonðð),€into€the€business.€€In€exchange€for€a€work€van€whichÏHusband€valued€at€about€$2,850€and€some€tools€and€equipment,€Husband€gave€Gilbertson€33%€ofÏthe€corporationððs€stock.€€Gilbertsonððs€33%€share€of€the€stock€came€out€of€Husbandððs€€share€ofÏstock„„Wife€retained€her€50%€share.€€In€addition,€the€company€bought€Gilbertson€a€newÏautomobile,€but€Husband€claimed€that€Gilbertson€had€agreed€to€a€reduction€in€salary€as€a€means€ofÏpaying€for€the€vehicle.Ìà àHusband€testified€that€the€house€he€and€Wife€lived€in€had€been€purchased€after€the€Court€ofÏAppealsðð€decision€had€been€filed€but€that€Wife€had€purchased€it€with€her€own€money.€€He€admitted€œÇthat›€he€had€paid€about€$900€or€$1,000€in€cash€for€a€new€fence€for€the€house.€€Husband€also€paidÏapproximately€$200€in€cash€for€paint€and€bought€$5,000€worth€of€carpet€on€credit.€€Ìà àHusband€submitted€several€exhibits€indicating€his€salary€and€Wifeððs€salary€€during€1993Ïand€the€first€eight€months€of€1994.€€In€addition,€he€submitted€a€self„compiled€breakdown€of€hisÏmonthly€living€expenses€and€his€total€debts€as€of€October€1,€1994.€€He€submitted€an€exhibitÏshowing€that€his€monthly€expenses,€joint€with€Wife,€were€$2,868.40€per€month€and€that€the€totalÏdebts€for€Husband€and€Wife€together€were€$18,896.79.€€This€list€did€not€include€the€mortgage€onÏHusbandððs€house,€titled€in€Wifeððs€name,€but€the€house€payment€was€included€among€HusbandððsÏmonthly€living€expenses.€€€Husband€testified€that€after€paying€their€bills€each€month,€he€and€WifeÏwere€left€with€about€$280€surplus€from€which€to€pay€alimony.Ìà àThe€record€in€this€cause€includes€the€history€of€Husbandððs€salary€and€Wifeððs€salary€fromÏModern€Telephone.€€€Prior€to€this€Courtððs€previous€decision€in€this€case,€Husband€consistentlyÏpaid€himself€$615.05€per€week.€€In€July,€1993,€approximately€three€months€after€this€CourtÏentered€its€previous€decision,€in€which€Husband€was€ordered€to€begin€paying€alimony€to€Ex„Wife,ÏHusband€decreased€his€income€from€the€new€business€from€$615.05€per€week€to€$615.05€perÏmonth,€with€the€exception€of€September€1993,€the€month€of€Husbandððs€arthroscopic€procedure,€inÏwhich€he€paid€himself€$1,230.10.€€Husband€attributed€the€decrease€in€his€salary€to€his€physicalÏproblems.€€He€continued€receiving€$615.05€per€month€through€February,€1994,€until€the€trial€courtÏordered€him€committed€to€the€workhouse€for€failure€to€make€the€payments€ordered€by€this€Court.€ÏThe€trial€court€released€Husband€on€April€14,€1994.€€In€June,€1994,€he€received€a€total€of€$913.91.€ÏThereafter,€he€began€receiving€$298.86€per€week€from€his€business,€nearly€twice€the€salary€heÏmade€before€his€incarceration.Ìà àPrior€to€March,€1993,€the€new€business€paid€Wife€$171.42€per€week€for€bookkeeping€andÏassisting€Husband,€while€she€also€was€holding€at€least€one€other€part„time€job.€€In€March€1993,Ïher€salary€increased€to€$250€per€week.€€She€was€not€paid€for€Christmas€week€in€1993,€duringÏwhich€she€apparently€held€seasonal€retail€employment,€but€she€received€a€Christmas€bonus€ofÍ$292.37.€€In€August€1994,€Wifeððs€salary€increased€to€$430€per€week.€€ÌœÇ›à àThe€trial€court€took€the€matter€under€advisement,€made€specific€œfindings€in€a€letter€datedÏDecember€1,€1994,›€and€subsequently,€on€February€3,€1995,€entered€an€order€incorporating€thoseÏœfindings:›ÌÓÓà8 àð ðThe€Court€cannot€find€that€Mr.€Loyd€willfully€depleted€the€business€which€wasÏpreviously€awarded€to€Ms.€Loyd,€since€there€were€no€restrictions€on€Mr.€LoydÏentering€into€a€competitive€business.€€At€the€present€time,€Mr.€Loyd€does€not€haveÏsufficient€funds€to€purge€himself€of€contempt,€which€puts€him€in€the€position€ofÏowing€the€arrearage€on€the€alimony€payments,€but€being€unable€to€pay€them.€€TheÏpayments€on€the€$99,000€indebtedness€are€upon€a€division€of€property€which€Ms.ÏLoyd€insists€has€no€value.ÌÌà8 àAn€IRA€was€converted€during€the€pendency€of€this€case€for€which€Mr.€Loyd€isÏindebted€to€Ms.€Loyd.€€The€Court€was€not€advised€of€any€conversion€of€thisÏaccount€in€a€timely€manner,€by€mistake€or€for€whatever€reason.ÌÌà8 àMr.€Loyd€is€indebted€to€Ms.€Loyd€for€the€unpaid€real€estate€taxes.ÌÌà8 àThere€is€a€note€outstanding€at€the€First€American€Bank,€but€the€evidence€is€notÏconclusive€as€to€when€the€debt€was€incurred,€or€who€is€responsible.€€Mr.€Loyd€hasÏbeen€placed€in€willful€contempt€previously€by€this€Court,€and€has€been€punishedÏaccordingly.ÌÌà8 àPerhaps€the€parties€could€agree€upon€a€payment€schedule€by€Mr.€Loyd€for€the€IRA,Ïtaxes,€and€the€alimony€that€had€accrued€before€Mr.€Loydððs€motion€for€modificationÏwas€filed€in€September,€1993.€€Since€Mr.€Loyd€is€not€capable€of€purging€himself€ofÏcontempt,€the€Court€has€reconsidered€its€decision€that€it€would€not€consider€Mr.ÏLoydððs€motion€for€modification€until€he€did€so.€€Further,€Mr.€Loyd€is€in€arrears€asÏper€Order€of€February€7,€1994,€in€the€amount€of€$1,412.50€[sic],€and€this€figureÏshould€be€considered€in€any€payment€schedule.ÌÌà8 àFuture€alimony€from€February€7,€1994,€will€be€considered€after€any€paymentÏproposal€is€presented€to€the€Court€if€such€can€be€reached€between€the€parties.ððÌÌÓÓ(The€February€7,€œ1994›€order€makes€it€clear€that€the€arrearage€referred€to€was€œ$14,125,›€rather€thanÏ$1,412.50.)€€The€œ€February›€3,€œ1995›€œorder›€œnoted€that,›€during€the€period€after€the€œDecember€1,€1994›Ïfindings€of€fact,€Ex„Wife€had€renewed€a€previous€settlement€offer€to€Husband.€€Husband€refusedÏthe€offer€and€did€not€make€any€counteroffer€or€proposal,€in€œcontravention›€of€the€trial€courtððsÏdirections.€€The€trial€court€later€made€its€order€final€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.02.€€It€is€fromÏthis€order€Ex„Wife€now€appeals.Ìà àOur€review€of€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court€in€this€case€is€òòò òde€novoó óóó€upon€the€record,Ïwith€a€presumption€of€correctness€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€No€presumptionÍof€correctness€attaches€to€the€trial€courtððs€holdings€of€law.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòò òAbney€v.ÏAbneyó óóó,€61€Tenn.€App.€531,€541,€456€S.W.2d€364,€369€(1970).̜Ǜà àThe€law€regarding€contempt€of€court€for€failure€to€pay€alimony€is€well€settled€in€Tennessee.€ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„9„102(3)€provides€that€Tennessee€courts€may€find€contempt€of€court€forÏð ð[t]he€willful€disobedience€or€resistance€of€any€officer€of€the€said€courts,€party,€juror,€witness,€orÏany€other€person,€to€any€lawful€writ,€process,€order,€rule,€decree,€or€command€of€said€courts.ðð€€AÏspouse€who€refuses€to€pay€court„ordered€alimony€can€be€incarcerated€for€contempt€until€he€purgesÏthe€contempt€by€paying€the€arrearage.€€òòò òLoy€v.€Loyó óóó,€32€Tenn.€App.€470,€479,€222€S.W.2d€873,Ï877€(1949).€€Generally,€however,€the€spouse€cannot€be€incarcerated€for€contempt€if€he€does€notÏhave€the€present€ability€to€pay€the€alimony.€€òòò òBradshaw€v.€Bradshawó óóó,€23€Tenn.€App.€359,€362,Ï133€S.W.2d€617,€619€(1939).€€If€he€is€able€to€perform€in€part,€the€court€may€incarcerate€him€untilÏhe€performs€to€that€extent.€€òòò òMowery€v.€Moweryó óóó,€50€Tenn.€App.€648,€654,€363€S.W.2d€405,Ï408€(1962).€€Ìà àTo€avoid€being€held€in€contempt,€the€spouse€claiming€an€inability€to€pay€alimony€bears€theÏburden€of€demonstrating€that€ð ðacting€in€good€faith,€and€with€an€honest€purpose€to€comply€with€theÏorder€of€the€court,€he€was€unable€to€do€so.ðð€€ò òòòBradshaw,€ó óóó23€Tenn.€App.€at€363„64,€133€S.W.2dÏat€620.€€Such€a€spouse€cannot€willfully€bring€about€his€own€inability€to€pay€the€alimony€and€thenÏuse€that€inability€to€avoid€being€held€in€contempt.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€362„363,€133€S.W.2d€at€619„20.€€ForÏexample,€a€spouse€cannot€refuse€to€pay€alimony€while€he€is€employed€and€then,€after€he€has€lostÏhis€job€and€spent€all€his€money,€use€his€poverty€as€an€excuse€for€being€unable€to€pay.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€362,Ï133€S.W.2d€at€619.€€In€òòò òBradshawó óóó,€the€Court€noted:€ÌÓÓà8 àð ðIf€he€[the€husband]€can€establish€that€he€is€actually€unable€to€comply€with€theÏdecree€and€that€such€inability€has€not€been€brought€about€purposely€as€a€result€ofÏhis€own€intentional€conduct,€such€facts€will€constitute€a€perfect€defense€to€theÏapplication€to€have€him€punished€for€contempt.€€Furthermore,€even€afterÏcommitment€he€is€entitled€to€be€discharged€if€he€can€establish€bona€fide€inability€toÏpay.€€But€when€his€ability€to€pay€may€be€drawn€from€the€evidence€and€reasonableÏdeductions€therefrom,€it€is€not€erroneous€to€decline€to€discharge€him€fromÏconfinement.€€Where€it€appears€that€he€once€possessed€the€means€of€complying,€butÏwilfully€impoverished€himself€with€the€idea€of€thus€defeating€the€allowance,€it€isÏevident€that€his€inability€to€pay€cannot€constitute€a€defense.€.€.€.€It€seems€to€be€theÏgeneral€practice,€however,€not€to€accept€present€lack€of€money€as€a€defense€forÏfailure€to€pay€past€instalment€of€alimony€if€there€has€been€any€material€income.ððÌÌÓÓòòò òId.ó óóó€at€363,€133€S.W.2d€at€619„20€(quoting€with€approval€17òòò ò€Am.€Jur.ó óóó€ðð€671,€at€510„11).€€€InÏaddition,€ð ðinability€to€pay€by€reason€of€obligations€incurred€as€a€result€of€remarriage€is€no€defenseÏto€a€contempt€proceeding€for€failure€to€pay€alimony€to€a€former€wife.ðð€€òòò òJohnson€v.€Johnsonó óóó,Ï499€S.W.2d€268,€271€(Tenn.€App.€1973).̜Ǜà àHusbandððs€conduct€in€this€case€demonstrates€a€systematic€determination€not€to€pay€any€ofÏthe€alimony€ordered.€€The€record€shows€that€Husband€has€never€made€a€single€payment€to€Ex„Wife,€even€prior€to€any€claim€of€inability€to€pay.€€The€trial€court€noted€that€there€were€noÏrestrictions€on€Husband€entering€into€a€competitive€business,€and€from€that€fact€concluded€thatÏHusband€had€not€willfully€depleted€the€original€business€awarded€to€Ex„Wife.€€While€HusbandððsÏconduct€did€not€violate€specific€prohibitions,€it€clearly€evidenced€his€intent€to€keep€Ex„Wife€fromÏacquiring€any€assets€of€significant€value.€€This€is€further€confirmed€by€Husbandððs€conduct€withÏregard€to€the€house€awarded€to€Ex„Wife€in€this€Courtððs€previous€decision.€€Husband€finally€turnedÏover€the€house€to€Ex„Wife,€but€not€before€stripping€it€of€items€such€as€built„in€appliances€andÏcabinets€and€otherwise€vandalizing€it,€demonstrating€an€intent€to€diminish€the€value€of€the€houseÏbefore€giving€possession€to€Ex„Wife.€€Ìà àIn€addition,€Husband€has€consistently€put€assets€in€the€names€of€other€persons€or€entities€inÏorder€to€place€them€out€of€reach€of€Ex„Wife.€€Half€of€the€stock€of€his€new€business€was€given€toÏWife€in€exchange€for€a€used€vehicle€of€minimal€value.€€Another€33%€of€the€stock€was€given€to€aÏnew€employee,€leaving€Husband€with€only€17%€of€the€stock€in€his€name.€€The€home€he€sharesÏwith€Wife€is€titled€in€Wifeððs€name,€although€Husband€includes€the€monthly€house€payment€amongÏthe€joint€debts€listed€to€demonstrate€his€inability€to€pay.€€Meanwhile€Husband€purchased€items€suchÏas€fencing,€paint,€and€carpeting€for€his€new€home€with€Wife.€€Vehicles€utilized€by€Husband€forÏpersonal€as€well€as€business€use€were€purchased€by€his€new€competing€business,€thereby€placingÏthem€beyond€Ex„Wifeððs€reach.Ìà àThis€course€of€conduct€must€be€considered€as€background€to€the€evidence€of€HusbandððsÏalleged€inability€to€pay.€€Central€to€Husbandððs€claim€of€inability€to€pay€are€his€physical€difficultiesÏand€his€decreased€income€from€his€new€business.€€Husband€claims€that€various€physical€problems,Ïsuch€as€an€arthroscopic€surgical€procedure€performed€on€his€knees,€pain€in€his€œback,›€and€a€heartÏcatheterization,€have€diminished€his€ability€to€do€the€physical€work€associated€with€his€business.€ÏThe€record€includes€no€medical€documentation€or€physicianððs€testimony€to€support€his€claim.€ÍHowever,€even€if€his€claim€of€physical€impediments€is€deemed€credible,€by€his€own€testimony€itÏdoes€not€prevent€him€from€contributing€substantially€to€the€business€and€earning€a€living,€albeitÏwith€assistance€from€other€employees.Ìà àMoreover,€the€history€of€income€from€the€new€business€to€Wife,€as€well€as€Husband,€mustÏbe€considered.€€Since€shortly€after€this€Courtððs€previous€decision€ordering€Husband€to€pay€alimonyÏto€Ex„Wife,€the€business€has€almost€invariably€paid€Wife€a€greater€monthly€salary€than€Husband,Ïalthough€her€work€is€in€a€support€role,€doing€bookkeeping€and€assisting€Husband,€and€she€wasÏalso€employed€elsewhere€during€much€of€œthe›œ€time.›€€€This€is€incongruous€at€best.€€œFurther,›€œunderÏHusbandððs›€œdirection,€the€salaries€paid€to€him€and€to€Wife›€from€the€business€œappear›€to€fluctuate€inÏresponse€to€Husbandððs€œneeds.€€For€example,€Husband€had€the€business›€double€his€salary€duringÏthe€month€he€had€the€arthroscopic€procedure€on€his€œknees.€€In€addition,€Husband€directed€theÏbusiness€€to€significantly›€increase€œhis€salary›€œwithin€two€months€after›€the€trial€court€released€himÏfrom€œincarceration,€although€he€was€released€because›€he€allegedly€could€not€œmake€payments€on€hisÏarrearage€to€purge›€himself€of€contempt.€€œShortly€after€that,€Husband€increased€Wifeððs€salary€fromÏ$250€per€week€to€$430€per€week.€€Husband€testified€that€this€increase€was€ð ð[t]o€try€to€offset€ourÏoutgoing€expenses€and€to€keep€€from€having€to€file€bankruptcy.ðð€›€€Ìà àDuring€this€time€Husband€has€not€made€a€single€alimony€payment€to€Ex„Wife.€€WhenÏdirected€by€the€trial€court€to€submit€a€proposed€payment€schedule,€he€has€refused€to€do€so.Ìà àAs€noted€in€ò òòòBradshawó óóó,€€the€burden€of€proof€is€on€Husband€ð ðto€show€that,€acting€in€goodÏfaith,€and€with€an€honest€purpose€to€comply€with€the€order€of€the€court,€he€was€unable€to€do€so.ðð€Ïò òòòBradshawó óóó,€23€Tenn.€App.€at€363„64,€133€S.W.2d€at€620.€€From€our€review€of€the€record,ÏHusband€has€failed€to€carry€this€burden.€€Indeed,€it€is€clear€from€the€record€that€Husband€hasÏdepleted€the€value€of€any€assets€turned€over€to€Ex„Wife,€titled€assets€within€his€control€in€the€nameÏof€his€new€wife€or€his€new€business€to€keep€them€out€of€Ex„Wifeððs€reach,€failed€to€attempt€anyÏalimony€payments€prior€to€the€onset€of€his€alleged€medical€problems,€exaggerated€the€impact€of€hisÏphysical€difficulties,€and€manipulated€the€stream€of€income€from€his€new€business.€€Ìà àThe€record€demonstrates€that€Husband€has€the€ability€to€perform,€at€least€in€part,€his€court„ordered€obligation€to€make€payments€to€Ex„Wife€and€to€purge€himself€of€contempt.€€Husband€hasÏfailed€to€carry€his€burden€of€proof€that,€in€good€faith,€he€is€unable€to€comply.€€The€evidenceÏindicates€that€any€inability€to€pay€is€primarily€a€result€of€Husbandððs€willful€conduct.€€Under€theseÏcircumstances,€Husbandððs€claimed€inability€to€pay€cannot€be€used€as€a€defense€to€incarceration€for€œÇÌcontempt.›€€In€the€past,€this€Court,€quoting€òòò òGibsonððs€Suits€in€Chanceryó óóó,€has€noted€theÏfollowing:ÌÓÓà8 àð ðThe€power€to€punish€for€contempt€is€one€of€the€highest€prerogatives€of€a€Court€ofÏJustice;€and,€upon€its€bold€and€prudent€exercise,€depend€the€respect,€the€dignity,Ïand€efficiency€of€Courts€as€arbiters€of€human€rights.€€The€mandates€of€a€Court€ofÏChancery€must€in€all€cases€be€obeyed,€according€to€the€spirit€of€the€decree,Ïpromptly,€faithfully€and€without€question€or€evasion.€€The€party,€upon€whom€theÏorder€or€command€of€the€Court€operates,€is€not€allowed€to€speculate€upon€theÏEquity€of€the€bill,€or€the€legality€or€regularity€of€the€order,€or€decree,€or€of€the€writÏissued€thereon;€but€his€simple€duty€is€to€obey;€and€when€he€disobeys€it€is€a€duty€theÏCourt€owes,€to€itself€and€to€the€public,€to€punish€him€at€once.ððÌÌÓÓòòò òJohnson€v.€Johnsonó óóó,€499€S.W.2d€268,€271„72€(Tenn.€App.€1973).Ìà àThe€trial€court€shall€order€a€payment€plan€for€the€reduction€and€eventual€elimination€of€theÏarrearage,€which€includes€œ$14,125›€in€past„due€alimony€and€division€of€property€payments,Ï$11,301.96€for€the€liquidated€IRA,€and€any€back€taxes€on€the€marital€residence€for€which€HusbandÏis€responsible.€€Based€on€the€amount€of€salary€Husband€received€prior€to€this€Courtððs€previousÏdecision,€$2,460.20€per€month,€the€plan€should€require€payments€of€at€least€$300€per€month.€€ThisÏpayment€shall€be€in€addition€to€the€$412.50€per€month€payment€toward€the€division€of€property€andÏthe€$1,000€per€month€alimony€previously€ordered€by€this€Court.œ× ƒ3 ××  ×›Ìà àIf€Husband€fails€to€abide€by€the€payment€schedule€ordered€by€the€trial€court,€he€should€beÏimmediately€incarcerated€for€contempt,€unless€he€presents€very€substantial€new€evidence€to€theÏcontrary.Ìà àWife€has€requested€costs€and€attorneyððs€fees€for€this€appeal.€€We€find€such€an€awardÏappropriate€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€determination€of€an€amount.€€Ìà àIn€sum,€we€find€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€thatÍHusband€is€unable€to€purge€himself€of€contempt,€and€this€finding€is€reversed.€€The€case€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€to€establish€a€payment€schedule€consistent€with€this€Opinion€and€toÏenforce€the€payment€schedule€by€incarceration€for€contempt€if€necessary.€€The€trial€court€is€furtherÏdirected€to€determine€the€appropriate€amount€of€costs€and€attorneyððs€fees€to€be€awarded€to€Ex„WifeÏfor€this€appeal.€€ÌœÇ›à àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed,€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€further€proceedingsÏconsistent€with€this€Opinion.€€Costs€are€taxed€to€Appellee,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ó ó