WPC o> ]h|8aF틞 - i,Q׻&!,zv%Vc yn ޷)iQ.f!mW\vUM c><}.%1!cս0| vZx 4.ϭH*0A;uAa|Z~ $d.BdEIDKOYÔEj 0dvqr'L% 9ތaڨSۉyՎkU3~ ˰;UNUVȪW3F lΊ}Vg`oo ("Er/?@)%FN&U=~0BHB&6q7s8ZHxc`!^/[YYl*@v5/U7\*o@EVD$j&*y4?W#+tH[x4nAl3&|oEQ?7V0՛'K}{np'mzUں{Sb#\ % 4# 0W UN 0D- ,q z^ w4 n4N6 m8OEWUNYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYb 0 B 0 D3[ D- 0K ASY 0 0D AHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0 * R$      1  5A   _T.C.A.366108(c)applies [_i]f_Ԁtheparentsareactuallyspendingsubstantiallyequalintervalsoftimewith  thechild.8[emphasisadded]T.C.A.366108(d)applies [_i]f_Ԁtheparentsarenotactuallyspendingsubstantially t equalintervalsoftimewiththechild.8[emphasisadded](`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(#$  0   " R$      2  5A   _TherecorddoesnotrevealwhyFatherchosetoattendlawschoolinKansasratherthanattendinglawschool  inMemphis,Tennessee,whereMotherresides. SeeShrempv.Shremp ,No._W1999_Ԅ01734_COA_Ԅ_R3_ԄCV,2000WL t 1839127(Tenn.Ct.App.Dec.7,2000).(MotherdidnothaveareasonablepurposetorelocatetoNorthCarolinatolive : withhernewhusband,aFederalExpresspilot,whereMother'snewhusbandhadnocompellingreasontorefusetomove N toMemphistolivewithMother.). 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.wpt0) Oo)0G3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U (I Z6Times New Roman Regular- -(|G2$ !.8Xd d 8         0  9 d(|3$ !.8Xd d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8Xd d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Ed d8     _  8/$XXdd 8  @ xINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#x #Ԉ &   November27,2000Session L X%X #XX%#_ELPIDIO_ԀPETEPLACENCIAv.LAURENROCHELLEPLACENCIAX%X  J @@ ADirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforShelbyCounty  J @@No.138164_R.D._ԀTheHonorableGeorgeH.Brown,Jr.,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W199901812_COA_ԄR3CVFiledDecember27,2000   AV) ` dE<|` A }     HollyKirbyLillard,J.,concurring. x  #XX%# X%X#XX%}#X%X    Iagreefullywiththeresultreachedbythemajorityinthiscase.Iwriteseparatelytoclarify < myreasoningwithregardtorelocation. (x   ThereasoninginthemajorityopinionreferstoTennesseeCodeAnnotated366108(d), P whichsetsforththestandardwherethechildspendsgreatertimewiththeparentwhoproposesto < relocate.However,underthefactsinthiscase,itisuncleartomewhetherthetrialcourt'shearing ( onrelocationwouldbepursuanttoT.C.A.366108(d)orpursuanttoSection366108(c),which  governsparentalrelocationwheretheparentsarespendingsubstantiallyequalintervalsoftimewith  thechild.Subsection(c)provides:  8  (c)Iftheparentsareactuallyspendingsubstantiallyequalintervalsoftimewiththe t childandtherelocatingparentseekstomovewiththechild,theotherparentmay8 ` fileapetitioninoppositiontoremovalofthechild.Nopresumptioninfavorofor L  againsttherequesttorelocatewiththechildshallarise.Thecourtshalldetermine 8!  whetherornottopermitrelocationofthechildbasedonthebestinterestsofthe $"t! child.Thecourtshallconsiderallrelevantfactorsincludingthefollowingwhere #`" applicable.8#L#   T.C.A.366108(c)(Supp.2000)(emphasisadded).Thestatutethenliststheeleven bestinterest %$!% factorssetforthinthemajorityopinion. &"&   Inthiscase,priortoMother'sinitialpetitiontochangecustody,Meganresidedprimarilywith (#( Father.AfterMotherfiledtheinitialpetitiontochangecustodyandFatherfiledhispetitionseeking )$) permissiontorelocatewithMegantoGeorgia,thetrialcourtorderedthat,duringpendencyofthe p*%* proceedings,custodywouldbeplacedwithMother.FathermovedtoGeorgia,andfornearlythree \+&+  yearsMeganresidedwithMotherwhiletheappealwaspendingtothisCourtandtotheTennessee H,', SupremeCourt.Whenthetrialcourtenteredtheorderatissueinthiscase,inNovember1999,  custodywasthenplacedwithFatherduringthependencyofthisappeal.     Underthesecircumstances,itisunclearwhichsubsectionofSection366108applies. t MeganresidedprimarilywithFatherwhenMother'sinitialpetitionwasfiled,residedwithMother ` fornearlythreeyearsuntilthetrialcourt'sNovember1999orderdenyingMotherahearingonher L  petitions,andhasresidedwithFathersincethen.Fatherarguesthatsubsection(d),whichgoverns 8  situationsinwhichthechildhasbeenspendinggreatertimewiththeparentwhoseekstorelocate, $ t shouldapplyinthiscase,sincethiscourtheldpreviouslythatcustodyshouldnothavebeenchanged  ` toMother.However,subsections(c)and(d)ofSection366108stateexpresslythatthetrialcourt  L  mustdeterminewhichsubsectionappliesbasedontherealityofwherethechildisliving,notwhich  8  parenthaslegalcustody._ #  1      _ԀTherefore,onremand,thetrialcourtmustmakeafactualdetermination $  ofwhetherMeganhasbeenresidingprimarilywithFatherduringthepertinenttimeperiod   (undefinedinthestatute),orwhetherMeganhasactuallyspentsubstantiallyequaltimewithboth   parents.     Inthisappeal,itisnotnecessaryforthisCourttodeterminewhichsubsectionofSection36 p 6108applies,becausefindingsnecessarytodeterminetheissueofrelocationhavenotbeenmade \ byeitherthetrialcourtorbythisCourt,regardlessofwhichsubsectiongoverns.Intheproceedings H thatwerethebasisforthefirstappeal,thetrialcourtfoundthatmaterialchangesincircumstances 4 warrantedachangeofcustodytoMother.Father'spetitionforpermissiontorelocatewithMegan  p wasnotdecided.  \   Onappeal,thisCourtreversedthetrialcourt'schangeofcustody. _Placencia_Ԁv._Placencia_ , 4 3_S.W.3d_Ԁ497(Tenn.Ct.App.1999)( _Placencia_ԀI ).Theappellatecourtnotedthattherewasno   evidencethatFather'smotivesforrelocatingwerevindictive,andthereforecouldnot serveasa   materialchangeincircumstanceswarrantingaredeterminationofcustody. Id. at500.The  appellatecourtalsoconcludedthattheotherchangesincircumstancesdidnotwarrantachangein  custody. Id. at502.TheappellatecourtthenwentontofindthatitwasinMegan'sbestinterestto  remaininFather'scustody,relyingheavilyonTennessee's strongpresumptioninfavorofcontinuity l ofplacement. Id. at503.TheissueofFather'spetitionforpermissiontorelocatetoGeorgiawith X  Meganwasnotaddressedonappeal,sinceithadnotbeendeterminedbythetrialcourt. D!   Consequently,undereithersubsection(c)orsubsection(d)ofSection366108,thefactual #l! issuesnecessarytodeterminerelocationhavenotbeendecided.Thisisparticularlytrueinlightof $X" thechangesincircumstancesthathaveoccurredsincethefilingofMother'sinitialpetitiontochange $D #  custodyandFather'spetitionforpermissiontorelocate.FathernolongerworksforWalMartin %0!$ Georgia;rather,heattendslawschoolinTopeka,Kansas._ #  2      _ԀMoreover,theperspectiveon continuity   ofplacementforMeganinascertainingher bestinterestshaschangedsincetheinitialpetitions,  giventhefactthatMeganresidedwithMotherduringthenearlythreeyearsprecedingthetrialcourt's  orderrefusingtograntMotherahearing. t   Inshort,theissueofrelocationmustbeaddressedbythetrialcourt,regardlessofwhether L  subsection(c)orsubsection(d)ofT.C.A.366108applies.Thisissueturnsonthetrialcourt's 8  findingofwhetherMeganhasspentgreatertimewithFatherorhasspentsubstantiallyequaltime $ t withbothparents,andneednotbedeterminedbythisCourtinthisappeal.  `   Onthisbasis,Iconcur.#XX%#X%X  8     `     h     ___________________________________      `     h     HOLLYKIRBYLILLARD,JUDGE