ÿWPC] ÜUq@5¬›¤È%ñk닇*©úEUÃŽh¥‹×4~Þá·çTèQ’Ì"¸Ì扎{Nâ9JÕÂEuÇ3i=Rn€Jjá§ ™¥ ì'剂R0c>ÁÁÿÍQiÈ76ã×‘ÎÆz¬tWƹf}Šhc¢‚$EIHf’—…£KWøbà+ùšv}= Éár$*µáR^Ré*ƒ?K2~Íj Ï0T.Ó3@‡VV²tþ´I’tSJ5ÂôѾ<*>—u 㜠òZî<92Ì3VÏ”GÖÂ`ÒÐg¢K¶ß)N+›¥Û÷¬Ô;íÁ•,í¡ä» h–qå¥ôä }¼‹¹Cy-™ë„LÍÖzõ:cãÐ/Â=¸&üù­8@Ç¢íçöxZA¤ŸFùÂ^lå¼Ä¬Ì‹Â$’†ÐPfúw¸Ãó{U„Õz+„ýhQ¸‘AÔr®¤D"ð˜{”W<‡o^Kru\’’Å˄ȺFågç™#"nžT}ñªaW+!hk*ÜØ¤¼ùŠ2¼ö uLW,d§ö…¶»Š"K³¥„¡„LˆH·þ­Ü…ØUvØÞVÀºJ"œZÚSíÜI$EÅíyÃi.cC`º!xÔ8"‘pXÊ!W¦b#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ Q™ Æê ưÆvÆ< 0DNFHHEPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPbRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR 0ëZZZZ BEE 0¤b D3 D-9 0Kff AS±Æ 0¤Ê 0Dn A«²˜\\IB01S08T\knoxclerk4ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»–¨_/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular²p)/ê:i¢×+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ GÝ ƒRµÝ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿Mò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€order€is€not€in€the€record;€however,€in€Husbandððs€written€response€to€Wifeððs€petition,€he€admits€herÐ ° Ðallegations€with€respect€to€the€existence€and€verbiage€of€this€order.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó - ù-(|G2µÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿Mò»»Ô d(|3G~$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G~$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µ»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€µ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼µ»»»ÔÑ8€]‘XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îµÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼µ»îî #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€September€15,€2003Ð üL ÐÔ‡X]‘X»¼µÔÌò òÔ#†¼µ»XX]‘#ÔMARION€MITCHELLòòóó€v.€PATRICIA€MITCHELLòòóóÔ‡X]‘X»¼µÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Anderson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€95CH2736€€€€€€William€E.€Ô_ÔLantripÔ_Ô,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌFiled€October€31,€2003Ð ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2002„03030„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€Ð ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€a€post„divorce€proceeding.€€Patricia€Mitchell€(ð ðWifeðð)€filed€a€petition€seeking€to€modify€theÐ xÈ  Ðpartiesðð€previously„modified€judgment€of€divorce.€€She€alleged€a€change€of€circumstances€and€soughtÐ d´ Ðð ðan€increased€alimony€award.ðð€€Some€23€months€later,€and€at€a€regularly€scheduled€hearing€on€theÐ P  Ðmerits,€the€trial€court€denied€Wifeððs€motion€for€a€continuance€and€dismissed€her€petition€againstÐ <Œ ÐMarion€Mitchell€(ð ðHusbandðð).€€The€trial€court€subsequently€denied€Wifeððs€motion€to€reconsider.€Ð (x ÐWife€appeals,€asserting€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€grant€her€motion€for€continuance€andÐ d Ðin€failing€to€reconsider€that€decision.€We€affirm.Ð P ÐÓÔÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ Ø( ÐAffirmed;€Case€Remandedó óÐ Ä ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼µ»àX]‘x#ÔÔ‡X]‘X.¼µÔCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€Franksóó€andÐ œì ÐòòD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ˆØ ÐÌKenneth€S.€Christiansen,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Patricia€Mitchell.Ð `° ÐÌLucinda€M.€Ô_ÔAlbistonÔ_Ô€and€Virginia€A.€Ô_ÔSchwammÔ_Ô,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€MarionÐ 8!ˆ  ÐMitchell.Ð $"t! ÐÓ®ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼µ»XX]‘Ý#ÔÔ‡X]‘X»¼µÔÐ ü#L# ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼µ»XX]‘M #ÔÔ‡X]‘X»¼µÔÓ  ÓÌà@´´)ìàI.ˆÐ À&"& ÐÌà  àThe€parties€were€divorced€by€judgment€entered€August€14,€1995.€€The€judgment€incorporatedÐ ˜(è#( Ðthe€partiesðð€marital€dissolution€agreement€(ð ðMDAðð),€which€recites€that€Husband€will€pay€WifeÐ „)Ô$) Ðrehabilitative€alimony.Ð p*À%* Ðâ âÐ \+¬&+ýf ÐÔ_Ôà  àOn€April€11,€2000,€Wife€filed€a€petition€to€modify€an€April€2,€1997Ô#†¼µ»XX]‘« #ÔÔ€X]‘X»¼µÔ,€order€of€the€trial€courtÐ ° Ðthat€apparently׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€modified€the€earlier„incorporated€MDA.€€The€April€2,€1997,€order€recited,€amongÐ œì Ðâ âother€things,€that€Husbandððs€final€rehabilitative€alimony€payment€was€to€be€in€the€amount€of€$250Ð ˆØ Ðand€was€due€on€August€1,€2000.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àHusbandððs€answer€was€filed€on€June€9,€2000.€€In€it,€he€denied€that€there€has€been€a€changeÐ L œ Ðin€Wifeððs€medical€condition€justifying€a€change€in€the€trial€courtððs€existing€decree€regardingÐ 8 ˆ Ðrehabilitative€alimony.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àHusband€filed€a€ð ðMotion€to€Dismiss€for€Want€of€Prosecutionðð€on€July€9,€2001.€€The€motionÐ ü L  Ðavers€that€Wife€had€taken€no€discovery€and€had€not€ð ðset€the€case€for€hearing.ðð€€On€August€23,€2001,Ð è 8  ÐHusband€filed€with€the€court€and€served€on€Wife€a€notice€of€hearing€on€his€motion€for€9:00€a.m.,Ð Ô$  ÐSeptember€17,€2001.€€Husbandððs€motion€was€heard€by€the€court€as€noticed;€it€was€denied€by€orderÐ À  Ðentered€September€27,€2001.€€In€the€same€order,€the€trial€court€set€Wifeððs€petition€for€final€hearingÐ ¬ü  Ðon€March€4,€2002.€€The€order€goes€on€to€recite€the€following:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà8 ` àIf€[Wife]€cannot€be€present€and€requires€a€continuance,€medical€proofÐ pÀ Ðas€to€her€condition€will€need€to€be€submitted€to€the€Court€or€[Wife]Ð \¬ Ðshall€face€sanctions.ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà  àà8 ` àDiscovery€in€this€cause€shall€be€concluded€forty„five€(45)€days€beforeÐ  p Ðtrial,€or€on€or€before€January€21,€2002.Ð \` x` x ÐÌ(Paragraph€numbering€in€order€omitted).Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àWifeððs€petition€to€modify€was€called€for€trial,€as€scheduled,€on€March€4,€2002.€€We€have€aÐ ¼  Ðtranscript€of€the€proceedings€that€day.€€The€transcript€reflects€that€the€trial€court€called€the€matter€atÐ ¨ø Ð9:50€a.m.€€When€the€case€was€called,€the€only€counsel€present€was€Ms.€Albiston,€attorney€forÐ ”ä ÐHusband.€€She€advised€the€court€that€Wife€had€taken€no€discovery.€€The€court€stated€that€Wife€hadÐ €Ð Ðnot€made€any€effort€to€present€evidence€to€the€court;€it€then€granted€Husbandððs€renewed€motion€toÐ l¼ Ðdismiss,€a€renewal€that€Husbandððs€attorney€had€orally€made€during€the€hearing.€€As€the€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðwas€concluding€its€remarks€pertaining€to€the€order€of€dismissal,€counsel€for€Wife€came€into€theÐ D!” Ðcourtroom.€€The€court€noted€that€the€time€was€then€9:55€a.m.€€When€asked,€counsel€for€Wife€statedÐ 0"€  Ðthat€òòhisóó€discovery€ð ðha[d]€been€completed.ðð€€Apparently€this€discovery€consisted€of€someÐ #l! Ðinterrogatories.€€The€record€does€not€reflect€who€actually€propounded€the€interrogatories;€nor€doesÐ $X" Ðit€show€the€person€or€persons€to€whom€they€were€directed.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€directed€the€witnesses€who€were€to€testify€to€come€forward,€when€counsel€forÐ Ì&"% ÐWife€orally€asked€the€court€for€a€continuance€ð ðjust€long€enough€to€allow€[Wife]€to€recuperate€fromÐ ¸'#& Ðthis€most€recent€surgery€[òòi.e.óó,€surgery€to€repair€her€knee].ðð€€The€lawyer€said€that€his€client€had€triedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€get€into€an€automobile€to€drive€from€Rock€Hill,€South€Carolina,€to€Clinton€for€the€hearing,€but€ð ðitÐ ° Ðbecame€obvious€to€her€.€.€.€that€there€was€no€way€that€she€was€going€to€be€able€to€make€a€four„hourÐ œì Ðdrive€in€a€car€when€she€ha[d]€to€keep€her€leg€immobilized€and€up.ðð€€Counsel€went€on€to€say€that€aÐ ˆØ Ðmedical€statement€ð ðthat€she€was€not€able€to€transportðð€was€to€be€faxed€to€him€that€morning.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àFollowing€counselððs€remarks,€the€trial€court€stated€that€it€was€going€to€deny€the€motion€forÐ L œ Ðcontinuance€ð ðat€this€particular€time.ðð€€The€trial€court€then€asked€Wifeððs€counsel€to€file€anyÐ 8 ˆ Ðdepositions€containing€medical€proof€showing€that€she€was€ð ðincapable€of€being€self„supporting,ððÐ $ t Ðpointing€out€that,€even€if€Wife€had€been€present€to€testify,€ð ðshe€c[ouldnððt]€testify€as€to€what€a€doctorÐ  ` Ðsaid€or€what€her€physical€condition€is€anyway.ðð€€When€it€became€obvious€that€Wifeððs€counsel€hadÐ ü L  Ðno€such€expert€testimony€to€offer,€the€court€again€denied€her€motion€for€continuance.€€When€askedÐ è 8  Ðif€he€had€any€proof€to€present,€counsel€for€Wife€replied€in€the€negative;€thereafter€the€court€dismissedÐ Ô$  Ðthe€petition€to€modify.€€The€dismissal€was€memorialized€in€an€order€entered€by€the€court€on€MarchÐ À  Ð19,€2002.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àOn€the€day€the€aforesaid€order€was€entered,€Wife€filed€a€motion€to€reconsider€supported€byÐ „Ô  Ða€motion€for€continuance€that€tracked€the€statements€made€by€Wifeððs€counsel€at€the€hearing€onÐ pÀ ÐMarch€4,€2002.€€Attached€as€an€exhibit€to€the€motion€for€continuance€is€an€unverified€writing€inÐ \¬ Ðlonghand€on€a€prescription€form€headed€ð ðCharlotte€Orthopedic€Specialists.ðð€€The€writing,€datedÐ H˜ ÐMarch€1,€2002,€is€as€follows:Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àà8 ` àPatient€unable€to€appear€in€court€today€due€to€being€medically€unableÐ  \ Ðto€travel€s/p€[?]€revision€total€knee€arthroplasty€ORIF€[?]€patella€fx,Ð øH Ðexterior€mechanism€[followed€by€one€or€two€words€that€this€court€isÐ ä4 Ðnot€able€to€decipher].ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌBelow€this€is€a€signature.€€The€court€cannot€be€sure€of€the€personððs€name.€€Apparently,€he€or€she€isÐ ¨ø Ða€medical€doctor.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAn€order€was€entered€November€7,€2002,€denying€Wifeððs€motion€to€reconsider.€€This€appealÐ l¼ Ðfollowed.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà@••)ìàII.ˆÐ 0"€  ÐÌà  àA€motion€for€continuance€brings€into€play€the€ð ðbroad€discretionðð€of€the€trial€court,€and€theÐ $X" Ðcourtððs€ð ðdecision€[on€the€motion]€will€not€be€set€aside€unless€there€is€a€clear€showing€of€abuse.ðð€Ð ô$D # Ðò òòòBarber€&€McMurry,€Inc.€v.€Top„Flite€Develop.€Corp.ó óóó,€720€S.W.2d€469,€471€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986);Ð à%0!$ Ðòòsee€also€ò òBarish€v.€Metro.€Govððt€of€Nashvilleó óóó,€627€S.W.2d€953,€954€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981);€ò òòòTiptonÐ Ì&"% Ðv.€Smithó óóó,€593€S.W.2d€298,€301€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1979).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àð ðAn€abuse€of€discretion€standard€contemplates€that€a€trial€courtððs€ruling€will€be€upheld€soÐ )à$( Ðlong€as€reasonable€minds€can€disagree€as€to€[the]€propriety€of€the€decision€made.ðð€€ò òòòState€v.€Gillilandóóó ó,Ð |*Ì%) Ð22€S.W.3d€266,€273€(Tenn.€2000).Ð h+¸&* Їà@vv(ìàIII.ˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àWife€focuses€her€argument€upon€the€fact€that€she€was€unable€ð!ð€because€of€recent€knee€surgeryÐ ˆØ Ðð!ð€to€be€in€court€for€the€hearing€on€her€petition€to€modify.€€We€believe€this€argument€completelyÐ tÄ Ðignores€the€trial€courtððs€basis€for€denying€the€motion€for€continuance€and€dismissing€Wifeððs€petition.€Ð `° ÐWe€now€turn€our€attention€to€the€trial€courtððs€real€rationale€for€its€actions.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àFollowing€a€hearing€on€September€17,€2001€ð!ð€at€which€time€the€trial€court€denied€HusbandððsÐ $ t Ðmotion€to€dismiss€Wifeððs€petition€for€failure€to€prosecute€ð!ð€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€in€whichÐ  ` Ðit€stated€that€if€Wife€could€not€be€present€for€the€hearing€scheduled€for€March€4,€2002,€she€wouldÐ ü L  Ðhave€to€present€ð ðmedical€proof€as€to€her€conditionðð€or€ð ðface€sanctions.ðð€€It€is€clear€from€the€recordÐ è 8  Ðbefore€us€that€the€trial€court€was€referring€to€ð ðmedical€proofðð€showing€that€Wife€needed€furtherÐ Ô$  Ðalimony€and€òònotóó€medical€proof€regarding€the€condition€that€prevented€her€from€being€in€court€on€theÐ À  Ðappointed€date.€€In€other€words,€if€Wife€intended€to€seek€a€continuance,€the€trial€court€was€going€toÐ ¬ü  Ðinsist€that€she€be€prepared€to€show€that€she€could€present€expert€medical€proof€arguably€supportingÐ ˜è  Ðthe€gravamen€of€her€petition.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWife€filed€her€petition€to€modify€on€April€11,€2000.€€Some€23€months€later,€she€still€had€noÐ \¬ Ðexpert€medical€proof€to€present€to€the€court€to€substantiate€the€allegations€in€her€petition€to€modify.€Ð H˜ ÐòòThisóó€is€what€prompted€the€trial€court€to€deny€her€motion€for€continuance€and€dismiss€her€petition€toÐ 4„ Ðmodify.€€A€court€does€not€abuse€its€discretion€when€it€dismisses€a€suit€because€a€claimant€ð!ð€almostÐ  p Ðtwo€years€after€filing€suit€ð!ð€cannot€present€testimony€to€make€out€his€or€her€case.€€The€problem€inÐ  \ Ðthe€instant€case€is€not€the€inability€of€Wife€to€be€in€court€at€the€scheduled€time.€€The€problem€is€thatÐ øH ÐWife€was€totally€unprepared€to€prove€a€medical€condition€requiring€a€continuation€of€her€alimony.€Ð ä4 ÐSuch€a€condition,€in€the€context€of€the€facts€of€this€case,€could€only€be€shown€by€expert€testimony.€Ð Ð  ÐThere€was€nothing€presented€to€the€trial€court€even€remotely€suggesting€that,€if€Wife€were€grantedÐ ¼  Ða€continuance,€she€would€be€in€a€position€to€prove€her€case€when€the€new€trial€date€rolled€around.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€did€not€diligently€prosecute€her€case;€consequently,€Husband€was€entitled€toÐ €Ð Ðan€order€of€dismissal.Ð l¼ ÐÌà@ll)ìàIV.ˆÐ D!” ÐÌà  àWife€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€grant€her€motion€to€reconsider.€€SheÐ #l! Ðcites€a€number€of€cases€dealing€with€motions€to€alter€or€amend€grants€of€summary€judgment€ð!ðÐ $X" Ðmotions€predicated€on€the€movantððs€desire€to€present€new€evidence.€€òòSee€ò òHarris€v.€Chernó óóó,€33€S.W.3dÐ ô$D # Ð741€(Tenn.€2000);€ò òòòSchaefer€v.€Larsenó óóó,€688€S.W.2d€430€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€These€cases€ð!ðÐ à%0!$ Ðdealing€as€they€do€with€summary€judgment€ð!ð€are€not€authority€to€support€Wifeððs€contention€that€theÐ Ì&"% Ðtrial€court€should€have€reconsidered€its€denial€of€Wifeððs€motion€to€continue€and€its€grant€ofÐ ¸'#& ÐHusbandððs€motion€to€dismiss.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€motion€to€reconsider€suffers€from€the€same€infirmity€as€that€of€the€motion€for€aÐ |*Ì%) Ðcontinuance.€€Neither€shows€that€Wife€had€the€necessary€evidence€to€make€a€òòprima€facie€óóshowingÐ h+¸&* Ðof€a€right€to€the€relief€requested€in€her€petition.€€The€motion€to€reconsider€did€not€bring€before€theÐ ° Ðcourt€anything€showing€that€Wife€had€any€admissible€relevant€evidence€on€the€issue€that€promptedÐ œì Ðthe€trial€courtððs€initial€decision.€€Furthermore,€even€if€Wifeððs€inability€to€travel€was€the€critical€issueÐ ˆØ Ðð!ð€and€we€have€held€that€it€is€not€ð!ð€we€would€be€loath€to€place€the€trial€court€in€error€based€on€anÐ tÄ Ðunverified,€somewhat€vague€and€undecipherable€statement€on€a€prescription€form.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€denying€Wifeððs€motion€to€reconsider.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà@‹‹)ìàV.ˆÐ  ` ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant,Ð è 8  ÐPatricia€Mitchell.€€This€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€collection€of€costs€assessed€below,Ð Ô$  Ðpursuant€to€applicable€law.Ð À  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_______________________________Ð pÀ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCHARLES€D.€SUSANO,€JR.,€JUDGE