WPC 73 ]Rϝ$}-2icG7;HQFXLCL#e˵[[.?eۘa[ްX)( _W8 CIaf2a(6{HvҖ?qaCx(2Z^.G4꣩fa>^F7^h抓YT@qp+UلJ*5qFqژ:0Yʈb %\UNb 0UN8<U@ 0D zF  U: ~ ^ JwVZ 4rNE m#bssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss 0{{{{ Bff 0 D5' D-\ 0K AS' 0 0D A(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular 2 R$      1  u  _ԀuuRule10(CourtofAppeals).MemorandumOpinion.!(b)TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudges  participatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhena t formalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated 8  MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequent L unrelatedcase.#uu# A u#u  A#(O Z(Times New Roman (#$  0   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.wpt,) AZ"Arial Regular t R$      2  u  _ԀThetrialcourtgrantedtheAppellantadivorcebasedonthegroundsallegedinthecomplaint,andtherecord  fullysupportsthatdecision.Assuch,wefindnoneedtodelveintothespecificfactsleadinguptothedivorce.u6) Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5~&)d.3|xUHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e,,,,0- -(|G2$ !.8dd8         0  u d(|3s$ !.8dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3s$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8TXXdd8  @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE# #Ԉ &   JUNE2000Session L XTX #XXT#WILLIELUEPRENTICEv.RONALDW.PRENTICEXTX  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforDavidsonCounty  J @@No.98D1059;TheHonorableMurielRobinson,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M199901507_COA_ԄR3CVFiledSeptember22,_2000_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     XTXXXTRonaldPrenticeappealsfromadecisionoftheDavidsonCountyCircuitCourt.Theappealinvolves x  adisputeoverpropertydivisionarisingoutofadivorce.#XTXXXT##XXTi#XTX d  Tenn.R.App.P.3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed  <   #XT#XTX.AlanE.Highers,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichFarmer,J.,andLillard,J., d joined. P KathyA.Leslie,Nashville,forAppellant ( StephanieC._Hatchett_,Nashville,forAppellee   #XXT#XTX#XXT\#XTX  XTXXXT@!MEMORANDUMOPINION  #  1      ׈ t   Atthetimethecomplaintfordivorcewasfiled,RonaldW.Prentice( Appellant)andWillie L  LuePrentice( Appellee)hadbeenmarriedforfourteen(14)years.TheAppelleefiledfordivorce 8!  alleginginappropriatemaritalconduct. d #  2      ׀Inthefinaldecreeofdivorce,thetrialcourtprovidedfor $"t! thefollowing: #`" 8  ThePlaintiff,WillieLuePrentice,shallberesponsibleforFiveHundred($500.00) #L# DollarsoftheDISCOVERCarddebt,baseduponhertestimonyregardingexpenses $8 $ surroundingherfathersfuneral.ThebalanceoftheDISCOVERcarddebt,allother %$!% creditcarddebts,includingthefollowinglist,andallotherjointdebtsshallbepaid  bytheDefendant/HusbandRonaldPrentice.ThePlaintiff,WillieLuePrentice,shall  beheldharmlessfromanyjointdebtsotherthantheFiveHundred($500.00)Dollar  amountontheDISCOVERcard.t       ..... L    8  Inlieuofalimony,thePlaintiff,WillieLuePrentice,isherebyawardedallinterest $ t inthemaritalresidence  ,...,andtheremainingfurnishingsinthehome.Anyrights,  ` titleorinterestthatRonaldPrenticemayhaveinthatpropertyisherebydivested  L  permanentlyandreinvestedinhersolely,subjecttothefirstmortgage. 8      ThesoleissuepresentedbytheAppellantiswhetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionin   dividingthepartiesdebtsandassets.Onappeal,ourreviewisguidedbytheprinciplethatthetrial   court'sdivisionofmaritalpropertyispresumedcorrect,unlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.   Tenn.R.App.P.,Rule13(d);_Hass_Ԁv._Knighton_,676S.W.2d554,555(Tenn.1984);Daltonv.   Dalton,858S.W.2d324,327(Tenn.Ct.App.1993).Trialcourtshavewidediscretioninthemanner p inwhichmaritalpropertyisdivided,andtheirdecisionsareaccordedgreatweightonappeal.Wade \ v.Wade,897S.W.2d702,715(Tenn.Ct.App.1994);Wallacev.Wallace,733S.W.2d102,106 H (Tenn.Ct.App.1987). 4   Afteracarefulreviewoftherecord,weconcludethattheevidencedoesnotpreponderate  \ againstthetrialcourtsdecision.Wenotethatatthetimeofthefinaldecree,theAppellantwas H incarceratedandawaitingtrialunderasubstantialbail.Evenifweweretoassume,_arguendo_,that 4 theAppellantcontributedtothecostsassociatedwithmaintainingthemaritalhome,theAppellee   isnolessdependantonthosecontributionsafterthedivorce.AstheAppellantapparentlyhadno   meansbywhichtopayalimony,thetrialcourtsdivisionofthepropertymaybecharacterizedas  alimonyin_solido_.    Asforthedivisionofthepartiesdebts,therecordindicatesthatmuchofthedebtwas l incurredbytheAppellanttosupporthisparamour,aswellashisdrughabit.Thecourtdidorderthe X  Appelleetopaythatdebtwhichwasdeterminedtohavebeenincurredbyher.Assuch,wefindno D! errorinthetrialcourtsdivisionofdebt.     0"    Finally,theAppelleearguesthatthepresentappealisfrivolousandasksthiscourttoaward $X" attorneyfeesanddiscretionarycosts.See_Tenn.Code_ԀAnn.271122.However,wedonotbelieve $D # thatthisappealfallswithinthepurviewoftheaforementionedstatutoryauthority.Eventhoughwe %0!$ affirmthetrialcourtdecision,wedonotbelievetheappealwasfrivolousastherewasanissue &"% regardingtheequitabledivisionofthemaritalassetsanddebts.Assuch,wemustdenythe '#& Appelleesrequestforfeesand/orexpenses. (#'   Forthereasonsstatedherein,thedecisionofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsofthisappeal |*%) aretaxedtotheAppellant,RonaldPrentice,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. h+&* Ї      #XTXXXT##XXT#XTX   `     h     ___________________________________ L     `     h     ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE