ÿWPCm 8#  UN+ %y 0(w@§4çûf  0l  0Dx 0J¼ 0T 0^Z 0h¸ h  0r& 0|˜ 0† 0š 1u* 0dŸ 0> 0CA B„ 0@¡ D3á U> B)R DC{ AM¾ U* AQ5 Ɔ 0DL 0D D/Ô B f'B))D3Ra…¸™ËQv~vÓš˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ J K L M N£OPQÓ€]bB\J#œœrœ3|xbÔ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô 2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$¥¥Ú  ÚÚ  Ú.("ÿÿ$‘‘òòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd* &Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd ýÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€(ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€(XÔÌÌò òNovember€24,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€(ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó% Line 8 d1111'ÿÿddTABLE_A ®Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ%ÝÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ý  ÝA€special€master€was€appointed€to€oversee€the€liquidation€of€Boots€For€Less.€€Ì ÁÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAs€for€the€Wifeððs€argument€on€appeal€that€deductions€for€advertising€and€car€expensesÏshould€be€added€back€to€the€partiesðð€gross€income,€our€review€of€the€record€reveals€no€evidence€toÏsupport€the€Wifeððs€contention€that€these€expenses€were€excessive.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.Ïch.€1240„2„4„.03(3)(a)€(amended€1994).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€JACKSONó óÌÙ€*ÙßR€'/&A1-j|xn` Å `€€@ÿRßÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌà à)Ìò òDEBORAH€JOANNE€CUPPLES€à àó ó)à àChester€County€Chancery€CourtÌò òPLUNKó ó,à à)à àNo.€8847Ìà à)à àÌ€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.A.€No.€02A01„9702„CH„00040Ìà à)Ìò òEDWARD€LEE€PLUNKó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Chester€County€at€Henderson.Ìò òHonorable€Joe€C.€Morris,€Chancellor€ó óÌÌÌÌò òMichael€B.€McWherteró ó,€SPRAGINS,€BARNETT,€COBB€&€BUTLER,€Jackson,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellant.ÌÌÌò òHarold€F.€Johnsonó ó,€Jackson,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÌà àò òFARMER,€J.ó óÌÌò òCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òLILLARD,€J.ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓà àPlaintiff€Deborah€Joanne€Cupples€Plunk€(Wife)€appeals€the€final€divorce€decreeÏentered€by€the€trial€court€which€awarded€custody€of€the€partiesðð€two€children€to€the€Wife,€orderedÏDefendant/Appellee€Edward€Lee€Plunk€(Husband)€to€pay€child€support€and€rehabilitative€alimonyÏto€the€Wife,€and€distributed€the€partiesðð€real€and€personal€property.€€We€affirm.ÌÌà àThe€parties€were€married€for€twenty„six€years€and€had€two€daughters,€who€wereÏthirteen€and€fifteen€years€of€age€at€the€time€of€trial.€€The€partiesðð€primary€source€of€income€duringÏthe€marriage€was€their€retail€western„wear€store,€Boots€For€Less.€€Until€the€time€of€theirÏseparation,€both€parties€worked€full„time€at€the€store.€€The€Husband€did€the€paperwork€for€theÏstore€and€sold€merchandise.€€The€Wife€waited€on€customers,€stocked€inventory,€maintained€theÏstoreððs€computer€inventory€system,€cleaned,€and€performed€other€tasks€as€required.€€The€WifeÏparticipated€in€the€management€of€the€store€and€was€capable€of€running€the€store€when€theÏHusband€was€not€there.€€ÌÌà àThe€parties€1992€and€1993€tax€returns,€respectively,€indicated€total€income€ofÏ$83,947€and€$63,252.€€Although€the€tax€returns€attributed€this€income€solely€to€the€Husband,€itÏwas€undisputed€that€neither€party€drew€a€set€salary€from€Boots€For€Less€and€that€most€of€thisÏincome€was€generated€by€the€store,€where€both€parties€worked€full„time.€€The€parties€also€earned€aÏsmall€income€from€their€activities€as€licensed€bail€bondsmen€and€from€rental€properties€which€theyÏacquired€over€the€years,€including€the€Magic€Valley€property€on€which€Boots€For€Less€was€locatedÏand€various€residential€properties.ÌÌà àAt€the€time€of€trial,€the€Wife€was€forty„three€years€old€and€had€a€high€schoolÏeducation.€€Most€of€her€job€experience€came€from€working€at€Boots€For€Less.€€After€the€partiesððÍseparation,€the€Wife€contacted€other€retail€stores€to€inquire€about€employment€opportunities.€€TheÏWife€did€not€think€it€would€be€a€problem€for€her€to€find€a€new€job.€€ÌÌà àThe€Husband€had€a€high€school€education€and€some€college€education€and€militaryÏexperience.€€Like€the€Wife,€most€of€the€Husbandððs€job€experience€came€from€his€employment€atÏBoots€For€Less.€€The€Husband€also€owned€a€one„half€interest€in€two€Subway€restaurants,€whichÏhe€formerly€valued€at€$25,000;€however,€the€Husband€testified€that€the€Subways€had€no€value€atÏthe€time€of€trial€because€their€debts€exceeded€their€assets.€€According€to€the€Husband,€the€SubwaysÏowed€$38,041.35€to€their€suppliers€and€$27,246.57€in€back€taxes.€€During€the€year€prior€to€theÏdivorce,€the€Subways€earned€no€profits.ÌÌà àIn€the€final€divorce€decree,€the€trial€court€divided€most€of€the€partiesðð€maritalÏproperty€equally,€with€all€real€property€to€be€owned€by€the€parties€as€tenants€in€common.€€TheÏmarital€estate,€which€was€valued€in€excess€of€$900,000,€included,€but€was€not€limited€to,€theÏfollowing€properties:ÌÌÔ*ƒ0213 dÔÔ,<ddÔÔ,<ddÔÔ+  ÔÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ àò òPROPERTYó óÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óò òà@ àAPPROXIMATE€VALUEó óÐ  „„ÐÓ  ÓMagic€Valley€propertyÐ  „„ÐÓ  Ó$€175,000Ð  „„ÐÓ  ÓMarital€homeÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ à$€150,000Ð  „„ÐÓ  Ó26€acres€adjacent€to€marital€homeÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ à$€104,000Ð  „„ÐÓ  ÓAccounts€receivablesÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ à$€376,500Ð  „„ÐÓ  ÓResidential€rental€properties€(equity)Ð  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ à$€€€40,000Ð  „„ÐÓ  ÓMorgan€Keegan€accountsÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ à$€€€41,400Ð  „„ÐÓ  ÓBoots€For€LessÐ  „„ÐÓ  Óà@ àUnknown׃4××  ×Ð „„ÐÌÌRather€than€ordering€a€distribution€of€the€proceeds€from€the€sale€of€the€partiesðð€real€property,€theÏtrial€court€ordered€that€the€proceeds€be€deposited€with€the€court€clerk€to€be€disbursed€later€pursuantÏto€court€order€or€agreement€of€the€parties.€€The€trial€court€awarded€the€Husband€his€interest€in€theÏSubway€restaurants.ÌÌà àIn€addition€to€distributing€the€partiesðð€property,€the€trial€court€ordered€the€HusbandÏto€pay€rehabilitative€alimony€to€the€Wife€in€the€amount€of€$400€per€month€for€a€period€of€twenty„four€months€and€to€pay€child€support€in€the€amount€of€$798.66€per€month.€€In€calculating€theÏHusbandððs€child€support€obligation,€the€trial€court€attributed€$40,000€of€the€partiesðð€total€incomeÏfor€1993€to€the€Husband.€€ÌÌà àOn€appeal€from€the€final€divorce€decree,€the€Wife€contends€that€the€trial€court€erredÏ(1)€in€calculating€the€Husbandððs€income€for€purposes€of€determining€child€support,€(2)€in€failing€toÏaward€permanent€alimony€to€the€Wife,€(3)€in€failing€to€award€the€Wife€any€interest€in€the€SubwayÏrestaurants,€and€(4)€in€failing€to€provide€for€a€definite€distribution€of€proceeds€upon€the€sale€of€theÏpartiesðð€real€property.ÌÌà àWe€first€reject€the€Wifeððs€argument€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€attributing€onlyÏ$40,000€in€gross€income€to€the€Husband€for€purposes€of€establishing€his€child€support€obligationÏwhen€the€partiesðð€tax€returns€showed€a€much€greater€income.€€At€trial,€the€Wife€requested€that€theÏtrial€court€award€child€support€based€on€the€Husbandððs€total€income€of€$63,252€as€reported€on€theÏpartiesðð€1993€tax€return.€€Although€the€partiesðð€joint€tax€return€for€1993€attributed€all€of€this€incomeÏto€the€Husband,€it€was€undisputed€that€most€of€the€$63,252€amount€represented€income€from€theÏpartiesðð€business,€Boots€For€Less,€that€both€parties€worked€full„time€at€the€business,€and€that€thisÏincome€resulted€from€the€efforts€of€both€parties.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€did€notÍerr€in€apportioning€$40,000€of€the€$63,252€amount€to€the€Husband€as€income€for€purposes€ofÏcalculating€child€support.ÌÌà àAs€part€of€this€issue,€the€Wife€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€requireÏthe€Husband€to€maintain€insurance€on€his€life€and€to€name€the€partiesðð€children€as€beneficiaries€ofÏthe€policy.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€T.C.A.€ðð36„5„101(g)€(1996).€€Inasmuch€as€there€has€been€no€showing€of€aÏtimely€request€to€the€trial€court€for€this€relief,€we€decline€to€grant€such€relief€on€appeal.€Ïò òòòMayfieldv.€Mayfieldó óóó,€No.01A01„9611„CV„00501,€1997€WL€210826,€at€*7€(Tenn.€App.ÏApr.30,€1997).€€The€Wife€also€contends€that,€in€calculating€the€Husbandððs€gross€income€forÏpurposes€of€determining€child€support,€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€include€depreciation€andÏother€amounts€and€in€failing€to€average€the€Husbandððs€income€as€shown€on€the€partiesðð€1992€andÏ1993€tax€returns.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€chs.€1240„2„4„.03(3)(a),€1240„2„4„.04(e)Ï(amended€1994).€The€Wife,€however,€did€not€raise€these€arguments€below.€€Instead,€she€requestedÏthat€the€trial€court€establish€the€Husbandððs€child€support€obligation€based€on€the€$63,252€in€totalÏincome€reported€on€the€partiesðð€1993€tax€return.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€Wife€has€waivedÏthese€sub„issues€for€purposes€of€appellate€review.€€ò òòòBarnhillv.€Barnhilló óóó,€826€S.W.2d€443,€458Ï(Tenn.€App.€1991).ÌÌà àEven€if€the€Wife€properly€preserved€these€arguments,€we€still€would€affirm.€€If,€asÏthe€Wife€argues,€depreciation€is€added€back€to€the€partiesðð€1992€income€and€the€1992€income€isÏthen€averaged€with€the€partiesðð€1993€income,€the€result€is€an€average€gross€income€of€$77,950.€ÏInasmuch€as€this€figure€represents€the€combined€income€of€both€parties,€we€conclude€that€the€trialÏcourt€properly€allocated€over€fifty€percent€of€this€income€to€the€Husband€for€purposes€ofÏdetermining€the€Husbandððs€child€support€obligation.× ƒ5 ××  ×ÌÌà àWe€also€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€award€the€Wife€rehabilitative€alimony€inÏthe€amount€of€$400€for€a€period€of€twenty„four€months€in€lieu€of€the€$2,000€per€month€in€periodicÏalimony€requested€by€the€Wife€at€trial.€€The€trial€court€has€broad€discretion€in€determining€whetherÏto€award€alimony.€€ò òòòLoydv.€Loydó óóó,€860€S.W.2d€409,€412€(Tenn.€App.€1993).€€In€deciding€theÏamount€and€type€of€alimony€to€be€awarded€in€this€case,€the€trial€court€was€required€to€consider€theÏfollowing€factors:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à(A)à àThe€relative€earning€capacity,€obligations,€needs,€andÏfinancial€resources€of€each€party,€including€income€from€pension,Ïprofit€sharing€or€retirement€plans€and€all€other€sources;ÌÌà8 àà à(B)à àThe€relative€education€and€training€of€each€party,€theÏability€and€opportunity€of€each€party€to€secure€such€education€andÏtraining,€and€the€necessity€of€a€party€to€secure€further€education€andÏtraining€to€improve€such€partyððs€earning€capacity€to€a€reasonableÏlevel;ÌÌà8 àà à(C)à àThe€duration€of€the€marriage;ÌÌà8 àà à(D)à àThe€age€and€mental€condition€of€each€party;ÌÌà8 àà à(E)à àThe€physical€condition€of€each€party,€including,€butÏnot€limited€to,€physical€disability€or€incapacity€due€to€a€chronicÏdebilitating€disease;ÌÌà8 àà à(F)à àThe€extent€to€which€it€would€be€undesirable€for€aÏparty€to€seek€employment€outside€the€home€because€such€party€willÏbe€custodian€of€a€minor€child€of€the€marriage;ÌÌà8 àà à(G)à àThe€separate€assets€of€each€party,€both€real€andÏpersonal,€tangible€and€intangible;ÌÌà8 àà à(H)à àThe€provisions€made€with€regard€to€the€maritalÏproperty€as€defined€in€ðð36„4„121;ÌÌà8 àà à(I)à àThe€standard€of€living€of€the€parties€establishedÏduring€the€marriage;ÌÌà8 àà à(J)à àThe€extent€to€which€each€party€has€made€suchÏtangible€and€intangible€contributions€to€the€marriage€as€monetary€andÏhomemaker€contributions,€and€tangible€and€intangible€contributionsÏby€a€party€to€the€education,€training€or€increased€earning€power€ofÏthe€other€party;ÌÌà8 àà à(K)à àThe€relative€fault€of€the€parties€in€cases€where€theÍcourt,€in€its€discretion,€deems€it€appropriate€to€do€so;€andÌÌà8 àà à(L)à àSuch€other€factors,€including€the€tax€consequences€toÏeach€party,€as€are€necessary€to€consider€the€equities€between€theÏparties.ÌÌÓÓÌT.C.A.€ðð36„5„101(d)(1)€(1996).€€Of€these€factors,€need€and€the€ability€to€pay€are€the€most€critical.€Ïò òòòLoydó óóó,€860€S.W.2d€at€412.ÌÌà àThe€evidence€in€this€case€demonstrated€that€the€parties€were€similarly€situated€inÏterms€of€their€respective€educations,€job€training,€earning€capacities,€and€assets.€€Both€parties€hadÏhigh€school€educations,€and€both€partiesðð€primary€job€experience€was€working€together€in€theirÏbusiness,€Boots€For€Less.€€The€Wife,€who€was€forty„three€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial,€testifiedÏthat€she€did€not€think€it€would€be€difficult€for€her€to€obtain€other€employment€in€the€retail€industry.€ÏThe€Husband€was€uncertain€as€to€his€future€employment€prospects.€€Moreover,€the€Wife,€like€theÏHusband,€was€awarded€one„half€of€a€marital€estate€valued€in€excess€of€$900,000.€€In€light€of€theseÏfactors,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€refusing€to€award€periodic€alimony€to€theÏWife.€€ò òòòBarnhilló óóó,€826€S.W.2d€at€454„56.ÌÌà àAs€for€the€property€issues€raised€on€appeal€by€the€Wife,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððsÏdecision€to€award€the€Husband€his€interest€in€the€two€Subway€restaurants€and€to€allocate€to€theÏHusband€any€debt€associated€therewith.€€Trial€courts€have€broad€discretion€in€dividing€maritalÏestates,€and€their€decisions€are€afforded€great€weight€on€appeal.€€ò òòòFisherv.€Fisheró óóó,€648€S.W.2dÏ244,€246€(Tenn.€1983);€ò òòòHarringtonv.€Harringtonó óóó,€798€S.W.2d€244,€245€(Tenn.€App.€1990).€ÏIn€light€of€the€Husbandððs€testimony€that€the€debts€of€the€Subway€restaurants€exceeded€their€value,Ïwe€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€declining€to€award€the€Wife€anyÏinterest€in€the€restaurants.€€We€likewise€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€inÏrequiring€that€the€proceeds€from€the€sale€of€the€partiesðð€real€property€be€deposited€with€the€courtÏclerk€prior€to€distribution€of€the€funds.€€ÌÌà àAs€a€final€matter,€we€deny€the€Wifeððs€request€for€an€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€onÏappeal.ÌÌà àThe€final€divorce€decree€entered€by€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appealÏare€taxed€to€the€Wife,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌLILLARD,€J.€(Concurs)