WPC4P  0~V 0x 0kL 0k 0" 0~ 0: 0 0 0 0  0 01 0C 0V( 0~ 0M 0 0 0X 0 0 0 0KUB %0 0z6 0 1 0 r 0= 0F 0P 1V 0 0O$#Es# 0}u# 0x# 0j$ 0j$ 0ea% 0W% 0W& 0t& 0j& 0b' 0( 0( 0w) 0X* 0L+ 0S, 0-m- 0@. 0/ 00 0#1 01 0^2 03 03 0l4 04 15?6nO6 0 46 B074M7 0a7^7 0J\88 0@R9 0J9w@9 D3: 0TO: 0^: 0h; 0ri; 0|; 0W< 0< 1um= 0d=U 6F>B)|>DC> AM>U*5?_?z@8BCEv~>GvH AONN 0DO D/O BPV& 8Document[8]Document Style0..8` ..` V8Document[4]Document Style.. . V 8Document[6]Document Style8..V 8Document[5]Document Style0..V/8Document[2]Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   V& 8Document[7]Document Style0..0` ..` zU :Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..2I.3  Ԁ..0..zh :Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..2A.3  Ԁ..0` ..` V?8Document[3]Document Style.. 21.3  Ԁ   z{ :Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  ..P 21.3  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. z :Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. .. 2a.3  Ԁ .. 0..z :Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..2(1)3  Ԁ..0h..hz :Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..2(a)3  Ԁh..h0..z :Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....2i)3  Ԁ..0..z :Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..2a)3  Ԁ..0p..pVX8Document[1]Document Style  @..8  2I.3  Ԁ     Ԉ l2:Technical[5]Technical Document Style.. 2(1)3  Ԁ. l2:Technical[6]Technical Document Style.. 2(a)3  Ԁ. l/%:Technical[2]Technical Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   .. l,!:Technical[3]Technical Document Style 21.3  Ԁ   .. l(!:Technical[4]Technical Document Style 2a.3  Ԁ   .. l:0:Technical[1]Technical Document Style  2I.3  Ԁ     .. l1:Technical[7]Technical Document Style.. 2i)3  Ԁ. l1:Technical[8]Technical Document Style.. 2a)3  Ԁ. <6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXR& 8BibliogrphyBibliography0....jo4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleS   1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 S CuyTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1fp2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleS #    I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)S !"($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0   A_ekqwDocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a)x?t2PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading Paper % z &(  &XXXXX6G''*d66G''*d6HH1HH2HH3HH4HH5HH6HH7HH8HH910111213141516171819202122232425262728  .+('2$ FT!   p4Heading 2Underlined Heading Flush LeftV4Heading 1Centered Heading@..  b* 8Bullet ListIndented Bullet List0..0` ..` B& $1Document Style0..8` ..` B $2Document Style.. . B $3Document Style8..B $4Document Style0..B-$5Document Style 23  Ԁ   B& $6Document Style0..0` ..` dS $7Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..23  Ԁ..0..df $8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..` 23  Ԁ..0` ..` B=$9Document Style.. 23  Ԁ   fy &10Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. 23  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. f &11Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..23  Ԁ .. 0..f &12Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h23  Ԁ..0h..hf &13Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..23  Ԁh..h0..f &14Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....23  Ԁ..0..f &15Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..p23  Ԁ..0p..pDV!&16Document Style  @..  23  Ԁ     Ԉ X/&17Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&18Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X-(&19Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X*$&20Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X)$&21Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X83&22Technical Document Style  23  Ԁ     .. X/&23Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&24Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ.   CRight ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)3|x<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@( T$   dڃ"$(G.29$ FT!   ŹXX     0  MARVINBERKELESLIEMcWILLIAMS($   0   VANNLASLEYPINCHAK NotzspousalKendrickTownerPearsallFitts("$    2 0Indent123  D{D"eEӀGGGG'dxd2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  RXYZ[\]^ ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 dhhhh7Border 1ddOiC << G<  9p`(Arial  F!  #d#g  kk   YYY FILEDkX December10,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.kAppellateCourtClerk   F!#d#g  I$g         ThemaritaldissolutionagreementalsoprovidesthemethodtodividetheannuityuponMr.Marquessdeath.TheseprovisionsrequirenodiscussionsincetheyarebeyondthescopeofthisopinionandhavenotbeencalledintoquestionbyMr.Marquess.  F!#d#g  I$g         Pensionrightsbecomevestedwhenanemployeecompletesthetimeofemploymentrequiredtoreceivethepensionuponretirementage.Kendrick,supra.Thus,thepensionremainsnonvesteduntiltheemployeehascompletedthetimeofemploymentrequired.  F!#d#g  I$g         The$11,000representsthemoneypaidtoMs.MarquessbeforeMr.MarquessretiredonMarch30,1996.The$20,000notedaspension/annuitybenefitsconstitutesthepaymentsreceivedfromtheOfficeofPersonnelManagementafterMr.Marquessretirement. w F!#d#g  I$g         Ms.Marquessreceived$2886permonthinalimonybeforeMr.Marquessretired.Itwasestimatedthatshewouldreceive$2542permonthinretirementbenefitsafterMr.Marquessretirement.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva OC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd F! . g    ћ72XXdd7\RA'\ `    , 5  h u` ќRjliA1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTIONPAULT.MARQUESS@ @ ) ROANECOUNTY@ ) 03A019707GS00260 PetitionerAppellant   @ )@ )@ ) v.   @ ) HON. THOMASA.AUSTIN,̀@ ) JUDGE@ ) @ CHARLENEJOANPARENTMARQUESS@ )̀@ ) RespondentAppellee@ ) AFFIRMEDANDREMANDEDSTEVEND.BROWNOFDAYTONFORAPPELLANTPATRICIAD.MURPHYOFHARRIMANFORAPPELLEE    OPINION         Goddard,P.J.  PaulT.MarquessappealstheGeneralSessionsCourtofRoaneCountysrefusaltomodifythepartiesmaritaldissolutionagreement.Theonlyissueraisedonappeal,whichwerestate,iswhethertheCourtbelowerredinfindingthatthedivisionofprospectiveretirementincome,adjustedforcostoflivingincreases,representedanonmodifiabledivisionofproperty,ratherthanalimonysubjecttomodificationuponamaterialchangeincircumstances.  Mr.MarquessandCharleneJoanParentMarquessNotz(hereinafterreferredtoasMs.Marquess)marriedonJanuary26,1961.ThepartiesdivorcedonMay14,1994,pursuanttoafinaldecreewhichincorporatedthemaritaldissolutionagreement.Paragraph1ofthemaritaldissolutionagreementprovidedthatMr.MarquesswouldpayMs.Marquess$1443biweeklyaspermanentalimony.However,these permanentalimonypaymentsweretoceaseuponMr.Marquessretirementordeath.Mr.MarquessalsoagreedtopayMs.Marquesshealthcareinsurancepremiumsinadditiontothepermanentalimonypayments.  Paragraph3ofthemaritaldissolutionagreementprovidesthatuponMr.Marquessretirement,Ms.Marquesswouldreceive50percentofMr.MarquessmonthlyannuityretirementbenefitsundertheCivilServiceRetirementSystem.Ms.MarquessentitlementtothemonthlyannuitypaymentsisbasedonthegrossannuityearnedasofJune1,1994,thefirstmonthafterthefinaldecreeofdivorcewasentered.ThemonthlyannuitypaymentsareadjustedupwardforcostoflivingincreasesafterJune1,1994,andarereducedby$157permonthtoprovideforpartialpaymentofseveralinsurancepremiums.AllmonthlypaymentsarepaiddirectlytoMs.MarquessbytheUnitedStatesOfficeofPersonnelManagement. m     Mr.MarquessworkedfortheUnitedStatesGovernmentforover30years.Duringtheentiretyofthemarriage,Ms.MarquesswasahomemakerandhadnoindependentsourceofincomeorpotentialtosaveforretirementotherthanthroughherhusbandsretirementannuityprovidedbytheGovernment.Mr.MarquessretiredfromemploymentwiththeUnitedStatesGovernmentonMarch30,1996.BothpartieshavereceivedtheirmonthlyannuitypaymentssubsequenttoMr.Marquessretirement.Ms.Marquesslistedonher1996taxreturns$11,000receivedpriortoMr.Marquessretirementasalimonyand$20,000receivedfromtheOfficeofPersonnelManagementaspensionorannuitypayments.  Bothpartieshaveremarriedsincethedivorce.Mr.MarquessfiledapetitiontomodifythemaritaldissolutionagreementonAugust12,1996.Thebasisofthepetitionwasthatthemonthlyannuitypaymentwasalimonyinfuturosubjecttomodificationuponashowingofamaterialchangeincircumstances.Mr.MarquessallegedthatthematerialchangeincircumstanceswasthatMs.Marquessremarried.Thus,shenolongerneededthespousalsupportprovidedthroughthemonthlyannuitypayments.  TheGeneralSessionsCourtheardargumentsonthepetitiontomodifyonApril17,1997.TheCourtdismissedthepetitionafterfindingthatthedivisionofthemonthlyannuitypaymentsfromMr.Marquessretirementincome,assetoutinparagraph3ofthemaritaldissolutionagreement,wasanonmodifiabledivisionofmaritalpropertyratherthanalimonysubjecttomodification.TheCourtstatedthatonlythefirstparagraphofthemaritaldissolutionagreementdealtwithalimonywhiletheremainderoftheagreementdealtwiththedivisionofthemaritalproperty.Forthefollowingreasons,weaffirmtheTrialCourtsholding.  Theonlyissueraised,aspreviouslynoted,iswhethertheCourtbelowerredinfindingthatthedivisionofprospectiveretirementincomerepresentedanonmodifiabledivisionofproperty,ratherthanalimonysubjecttomodificationuponachangeincircumstances.  Webeginouranalysisbynotingthatpensionrightsprovidepostretirementfinancialsecurityinmanymarriages.Theserightsarefrequentlythemostvaluableassetsinmanymaritalestates.Kendrickv.Kendrick,902S.W.2d918(Tenn.App.1994).  Bothvestedandnonvested n   ׀retirementbenefitpensionrightswhichaccrueduringmarriagearemaritalpropertysubjecttoequitabledistributionindivorcecasesunderT.C.A.364121.Cohenv.Cohen,937S.W.2d823(Tenn.1996);Kendrick,supra.Therefore,thepensionrightsatissueinthiscase,whethervestedornonvested,aremaritalproperty.Sincebothvestedandnonvestedpensionrightsaremaritalproperty,ouranalysisofthisappealdoesnotrelyonthestatusofthepensionrights.  Courtscannotmodifydivisionsofmaritalpropertyafterthedivorce,butmaymodifyalimonyuponashowingofchangedcircumstances.Townerv.Towner,858S.W.2d888(Tenn.1993).Thus,thedeterminativeinquiryinthiscaseiswhetherparagraph3ofthemaritaldissolutionagreementwasadivisionofmaritalpropertyoralimony.Thisissuecanonlyberesolvedbyexaminingthelanguageoftheprovisionandthecircumstancesregardingtheexecutionoftheprovision.Towner,supra.Courtsmustconstruedivorcedecreesincorporatingpropertysettlementsastheywouldanyotherwritteninstrument.Halev.Hale,838S.W.2d206(Tenn.App.1992).Thewordsofacontractexpressingparties'intentshouldbegiventheir usual,naturalandordinarymeaning.Taylorv.WhiteStores,Inc.,707S.W.2d514(Tenn.App.1985).Also,wheninterpretingcontracts,courtsmustascertainthepartiesintentandgiveeffecttothatintent,consistentwithlegalprinciples.BobPearsallMotors,Inc.v.RegalChryslerPlymouth,Inc.,521S.W.2d578(Tenn.1975).  Wemustfirstexaminethestructureandtermsofthemaritaldissolutionagreement. Alimonyisonlydiscussedorreferredtoinparagraph1oftheagreement.Paragraph3oftheagreement,whichincludestheallocationoftheretirementbenefits,nevermentionsthewordalimonynorimpliesthatthesebenefitsarealimony.Theremainderofthemaritaldissolutionagreementdividesthepartiesmaritalproperty.Therelevantportionofparagraph3statesthat:    Attheretirementof[Mr.Marquess]with[Mr.Marquess]eligibleforretirementbenefitsundertheCivilServiceRetirementSystembasedonemploymentwiththeUnitedStatesGovernment,[Ms.Marquess]shallbeentitledtofiftypercent(50%)of[Mr.Marquess]grossmonthlyannuityearnedasofJune1,1994,undertheCivilServiceRetirementSystem....This50%entitlementistobereducedby$157permonthtoprovideforalltheinsurancepremiumsresponsibilityinparagraph2.(Emphasisadded.)      Entitleisalegaltermofart.TheTennesseeSupremeCourtstatedthatto entitletoistogivearightto.Fittsv.TerminalWarehousingCorp.,170Tenn.198,93S.W.2d1265(Tenn.1936).Thus,uponMr.Marquessretirement,Ms.Marquessreceivedarightto50percentofMr.Marquessretirementbenefits.Thisawardisarighttomaritalproperty.Thus,paragraph3grantsMs.MarquessapropertyrightinMr.Marquessretirementbenefits.Thelanguageofgrantinparagraph3doesnotappeartobeevencloselyrelatedtoalimony,butdoesappeartobeadivisionofmaritalproperty.Thus,basedonthelanguageandstructureofthemaritaldissolutionagreement,paragraph3appearstobeadivisionofmaritalpropertyandnotanawardofalimony.  Ms.Marquessactionsalsoshowherunderstandingthathermonthlypaymentofretirementbenefitsishershareofthemaritalpropertyandnotalimony.Aspreviouslynoted,Ms.Marquessreportedonher1996taxformsthatshereceived$11,000asalimonyand$20,000aspension/annuitybenefits. o   ׀TheseincometaxformsevidenceMs.Marquessunderstandingthatthepaymentsshereceivedfromthepensionbenefitswerenotalimony,buthershareofthemaritalproperty.  Courtsoftendividemaritalpropertyretirementbenefitsbyawardingaspouseperiodicpaymentsdirectlyfromthepensionfund.Cohen,supra;Towner,supra;Kendrick,supra.InTowner,theTennesseeSupremeCourtheldthatanagreementinthe alimonysectionofthepropertydissolutionagreementwasactuallyanonmodifiabledivisionofmaritalproperty.Theprovisioninquestionstatedthatthewifewouldreceive$387.30permonthof spousalsupport/alimonyinconsiderationofthewifewaivingallrightstothehusbandsretirementbenefits.Thesepaymentsweretocontinueforthelifetimeofthehusband.TheTownerCourtstatedthatthedefinitionofmaritalpropertysubjecttodivision,locatedatT.C.A.364121(b)(1)(B),contemplatesthedistributionofpropertyrightsintheformofperiodicpayments.Further,theCourtfoundthatthepaymentsthatMs.TownerreceivedwereadistributionofaportionofMr.Townersretirementbenefits.Therefore,theagreementinTownerwasheldtobeadivisionofmaritalpropertyratherthanalimony.  ThepresentcaseissimilartoTownerinmanyrespects.However,theMarquessmaritaldissolutionagreementnowherestatesthattheagreementwasspousalsupportoralimony.TheMarquessagreementdidcontainlanguagethatgrantsarightinpropertythroughtheuseof entitle.Ms.MarquessalsodidnotagreetoforegoallrightstoMr.Marquessretirementbenefitsinreturnforthemonthlypayments.ThepresentcaseappearsmorelikeadivisionofmaritalpropertythantheagreementinTowner.Thisconclusionfurthersupportsourdeterminationthattheagreementinquestionisanonmodifiabledivisionofmaritalpropertyratherthanalimony.  Further,itappearsfromtherecordthatthepartiesenteredintothemaritaldissolutionagreementfreely,ingoodfaith,andwithoutcoercionorduress.WenotethatMr.Marquessdraftedtheinitialagreementwithouttheaidofcounsel.HethensentthedrafttoMs.Marquesscounselforfurtherrevisions.Ms.Marquesscounselthenpreparedthefinaldraftoftheagreement.Mr.MarquessworkedwithMs.MarquesscounselindraftingtheagreementknowingthatcounselrepresentedMs.Marquessinterestsandnothis.Mr.Marquesscouldhaveretainedcounseltorepresenthimatanytimeduringthenegotiationandpreparationoftheagreement,butfailedtodoso.  Althoughtheamountsofthepreretirementalimonyandtheawardofthepensionbenefitsarelargelyequivalent, p   ׀thisfactdoesnotconvincetheCourtthattheawardofthepensionbenefitsconstitutesalimony.ThefactthatthemonthlypaymentsfromtheretirementbenefitsareadjustedforcostoflivingpurposesalsodoesnotconvincethisCourtthatthemonthlypaymentsarealimony.  AstheTrialCourtnoted,thesplitofmaritalpropertyappearsuneven.However,maritalpropertydivisionsmustbeequitable,butdonothavetobeequal.Kendrick,supra.Webelievethatthemaritaldissolutionagreementsawardof50percentoftheretirementbenefitstoMs.MarquesswasanequitableagreementinlightofMs.Marquesshavingnoothersourceofincometorelyuponforsupportthroughherretirementyears.  Toreiterate,weholdthattheawardof50percentofMr.Marquessretirementbenefits,setoutinparagraph3ofthemaritaldissolutionagreement,toMs.Marquessisadivisionofmaritalpropertyandthusnotsubjecttomodification.  Fortheforegoingreasons,weaffirmthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtandremandthecauseforsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessaryandcollectionofcostsbelow.CostsofappealareadjudgedagainstMr.Marquessandhissurety.      _______________________________      HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.CONCUR:________________________________HerschelP.Franks,J.________________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.