ÿWPCž 0U:° %êbðøn­ 04µéw@ñ41 0JE 0T 0^ã 0hA 0r© 0| 0†— 0 1u­ 0d"U>† AQÄÆ 0DÛ 0@ 0D_ B)£ D/Ì Bû B D35 DCh AM« U*ø +" v~M vÓË<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTX- ù-3|x «<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@( ¤T$¡¡Ó  Ó úDûUüDýDþÿUDÓ€ ê‚_#2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó% Line 7 d(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd%%%%7Border 1dd!#*Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial !Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€,ÔÔ€,ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€,XÔÌÌDecember€12,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(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  ÝÑ ` ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€vÙXXdÖdÈ7ÑÑ€ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€Ôò ò›Þ ÞÌBRIDGET€C.€RASMUSSEN,à àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà à€€€à àà à€€€)€Montgomery€ChanceryÌà àPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àà à€€€)€€No.€95„07„0128Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)€€Appeal€No.ÌÙ€!ÙœßR€+-*A1-j|ì` ç `€€@ÿRß›LEIF€C.€RASMUSSEN,à àà àà à€€€)€€01„A„01„9705„CH„00211Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à€€€)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÓ  Óò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€MONTGOMERY€COUNTYÌ€AT€CLARKSVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓHONORABLE€ALEX€W.€DARNELL,€CHANCELLORÌÓ  Óó óÌÌKevin€C.€Kennedy,€#010793Ì127€South€Third€StreetÌClarksville,€TN€37040ÌATTORNEY€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLANTÌÌGary€J.€Hodges,€#1605Ì115€South€Third€StreetÌP.O.€Box€645ÌClarksville,€TN€37041„0645ÌATTORNEY€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLEEÌÌÌÓ  Óò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDED€ÌWITH€INSTRUCTIONSó óÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌÌÌÌœÌÌÌÌ›ÌCONCUR:ÌœBEN›€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌœÌDISSENT€IN€SEPARATE€OPINION:ÌWILLIAM›€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌœÌò òBRIDGET›€C.€RASMUSSEN,à àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà à€€€à àà à€€€)€Montgomery€ChanceryÌà àPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àà à€€€)€€No.€95„07„0128Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)€€Appeal€No.ÌLEIF€C.€RASMUSSEN,à àà àà à€€€)€€01„A„01„9705„CH„00211Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àDefendants/Appellees.à àà à€€€)ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÓ  Óò òòòÔ€¼ÔO€€P€€I€€N€€I€€O€€NÔ€XÔóóó óÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà àOn€November€26,€1996,€the€plaintiff,€Bridget€C.€Rasmussen€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€fromÏthe€judgment€of€this€Court€entered€in€this€action€on€the€4th€and€7th€day€of€November,€1996.€€TheÏorder€entered€on€November€4,€1996,€was€entitled€ð ðFinal€Decree€of€Divorce.ðð€€The€order€entered€onÏNovember€7,€1996,€stated€that€it€was€entered€upon€the€motion€by€the€complainant€and€the€petitionsÏof€€the€defendant€regarding€visitation€of€the€complainant,€Bridget€C.€Rasmussen.€€The€resultingÏrecord€was€filed€in€this€Court€on€February€3,€1997,€under€No.€01A01„9701„CH„00045.ÌÌà àOn€March€17,€1997,€the€plaintiff,€Bridget€C.€Rasmussen€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€from€theÏjudgments€of€this€Court€entered€in€court€orders€of€the€Final€Decree€of€November€4,€1996,€theÏCourt€Order€of€November€7,€1996,€and€the€Court€Order€of€March€3,€1997.€€The€March€3,€1997,Ïorder€states:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àThis€matter€came€to€be€heard€before€the€HonorableÏAlex€W.€Darnell,€Chancellor€for€the€Chancery€Court€ofÏMontgomery€County,€Tennessee,€and€it€appearing€to€theÏCourt€that€there€should€be€no€award€of€alimony€and€that€theÏparties€have€divided€the€property€of€the€marriage.ÌÌà àIT€IS€THEREFORE€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€ANDÏDECREED€by€the€Court€that€there€is€no€award€of€alimony€inÏthis€matter.ÌÌà à2.à àIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED,€ADJUDGEDÏAND€DECREED€by€the€Court€that€the€property€of€theÏmarriage€has€been€divided€by€the€parties.ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àThe€resulting€record€was€filed€with€the€Clerk€of€this€Court€on€May€16,€1997,€under€No.Ï01A01„9705„CH„00211.ÌÌà àOn€May€19,€1997,€counsel€for€appellant€wrote€the€Clerk€of€this€Court€requesting€that€theÏtwo€appeals€be€consolidated,€but€no€motion€was€made€to€this€Court€and€no€consolidation€order€hasÏbeen€entered€by€this€Court.€€Nevertheless,€the€parties€have€filed€their€briefs€and€otherwise€treatedÏthe€two€appeals€as€consolidated.€€For€judicial€economy,€this€opinion€will€discuss€and€dispose€ofÏboth€appeals.ÌÌà àExcept€as€indicated,€the€following€facts€are€undisputed:ÌÌà àThe€parties€were€married€September€4,€1993,€at€which€time€the€husband€was€a€member€ofÏthe€armed€forces€stationed€at€Ft.€Campbell,€Kentucky€near€Clarksville,€The€wife€attended€AustinÏPeay€State€University€and€was€employed€in€a€diagnostic€center.€€Their€only€child,€a€son,€was€bornÏSeptember€7,€1994.€€The€parties€separated€about€July€1995.€€The€wife€moved€to€Virginia€to€liveÍwith€her€parents.€€At€the€time€of€the€trial,€the€husbandððs€station€had€been€moved€to€Arizona€for€anÏexpected€term€of€four€years.ÌÌà àOn€October€25,€1996,€the€Trial€Judge€filed€his€opinion€containing€the€following:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àJessie€Summer,€Kimberly€Lascottie,€Cliff€andÏElizabeth€Mullens,€Aaron€Peeks,€Patrick€and€Alex€Galvin,ÏJessie€Summer,€Jr.,€and€Kelly€Carlton€gave€testimony€thatÏwas€generally€unfavorable€to€Ms.€Rasmussen.€€TheÏcollective€testimony€of€these€persons€would€substantiate€anÏunnatural€relationship€of€Ms.€Rasmussen€with€anotherÏwoman.€€It€would€also€show€that€Bridget€became€upsetÏwhen€she€had€to€deal€with€the€child€and€did€not€do€a€veryÏgood€job.€€They€would€all€generally€agree€that€theÏRasmussensðððð€cursed€at€each€other,€to€an€extent€that€it€wasÏvery€obvious.€€The€Court€does€not€choose€to€recite€all€theÏtestimony€of€these€parties€on€which€notes€were€taken€butÏonly€that€they€detail€some€inappropriate€statements€of€Ms.ÏRasmussen€and€that€she€had€not€given€quality€treatment€toÏher€child.ÌÌà àThe€cumulative€evidence€in€this€cause€places€BridgetÏRasmussen€in€a€more€unfavorable€position€than€LeifÏRasmussen.€€The€Court€believes€that,€although€BridgetÏprovided€the€most€care€for€the€child,€it€was€provided€in€someÏmeasure,€under€protest.€€Ms.€Rasmussen€has€not€beenÏwilling€to€sever€her€emotional€ties€to€Joanne€Darshay€evenÏwhen€the€care€of€the€child€was€affected.ÌÌà àThe€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€best€interest€ofÏthe€child€would€be€served€by€creating€a€joint€custodyÏarrangement.€€Leif€C.€Rasmussen€would€be€designated€asÏthe€primary€custodian€of€the€child.€€As€such€he€would€haveÏthe€authority€to€choose€the€child€care€givers€and€medicalÏpersonnel€who€might€treat€the€child.€€The€hours€in€whichÏeach€party€would€have€the€child€in€their€personal€care€wouldÏbe€the€same€as€in€the€Order€in€this€cause€filed€for€record€onÏOctober€20,€1995.€€The€Court€believes€this€would€beÏappropriate€inasmuch€as€the€parties€have€followed€thisÏdirective€for€over€a€year€and€both€live€in€near€proximity€ofÏthe€other.€€In€the€event€that€either€party€were€to€removeÏhimself€or€herself€from€the€immediate€area€of€Clarksville,ÍTennessee,€they€should€make€a€written€proposal€to€the€otherÏparty€and€try€to€reach€some€agreement€for€future€visitation€inÏthe€event€of€such€a€move.€€If€no€agreement€is€forthcomingÏthe€burden€shall€be€on€the€person€seeking€to€move€to€file€aÏpetition€for€a€declaration€by€the€Court.ÌÌà àDue€to€the€near€equal€care€to€the€child€by€the€partiesÏMr.€Rasmussen€shall€pay€the€child€care€provider€and€BridgetÏRasmussen€shall€pay€to€Mr.€Rasmussen€for€support€the€sumÏof€$175.00€per€month.ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àThe€order€entered€on€November€4,€1996,€provided€for€extensive€and€detailed€visitation€andÏshared€expense€of€travel.ÌÌà àThe€order€of€November€7,€1996,€contained€further€details€of€transfer€of€physical€custody€ofÏthe€child€from€time€to€time.ÌÌà àUpon€arrival€of€the€record€in€the€first€appeal,€the€appeal€was€dismissed€by€this€Court€forÏlack€of€a€final€judgment€and€the€cause€was€remanded€for€adjudication€of€the€issues€of€propertyÏdivision€and€alimony.ÌÌà àOn€February€14,€1997,€the€plaintiff„wife€filed€in€the€trial€court€the€following€motion:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àCome€now€the€Complainant,€Bridget€C.€Rasmussen,Ïby€and€through€her€attorney€of€record,€Kevin€C.€Kennedy,Ïpursuant€to€a€request€from€the€Court€of€Appeals,€andÏrespectfully€moves€this€Honorable€Court€for€a€ruling€on€theÏissues€of€alimony€and€distribution€of€property.ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌÌÌà àOn€March€17,€1997,€the€plaintiff„wife€filed€the€second€notice€of€appeal€mentioned€above.ÌÌà àThe€appellant„wife€presents€the€following€issues€for€review:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓ  ÓÓÓI.ÌÓ  Óà àWhether€joint€custody€is€in€the€best€interest€of€theÏpartiesðð€minor€child?ÌÓ  ÓII.ÌÓ  Óà àWhether€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€inÏfavor€of€an€award€of€custody€of€the€partiesðð€minor€child€toÏthe€appellant?ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àThe€appellee„husband€states€the€issue€as€follows:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àI.à àWhether€the€Trial€Court€abused€its€discretionÏby€virtue€of€awarding€the€partiesðð€joint€custody€of€theirÏminor€child,€and€awarding€the€Appellee€primary€care,Ïcustody€and€control€of€said€child?ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àIt€is€seen€that€the€only€issue€for€resolution€in€this€appeal€is€custody€of€the€minor€child€of€theÏparties.ÌÌà àAppellant„wife€insists€that€the€award€of€joint€custody€is€unreasonable,€but€concedes€that€theÏTrial€Courts€have€broad€discretion€in€matters€of€child€custody€which€discretion€should€not€beÏdisturbed€on€appeal€in€the€absence€of€clear€error€in€exercise€of€the€discretion.€€òòGray€v.€Grayóó,€Tenn.ÏApp.€1994,€885€S.W.2d€353;€òòRiddick€v.€Riddickóó,€Tenn.€App.€1973,€497€S.W.2d€740.€€TheÏwelfare€and€best€interest€of€the€child€is€the€prime€consideration.€€òòLentz€v.€Lentzóó,€Tenn.€1986,€717ÏS.W.2d€876.ÌÌà àAppellee„husband€argues€that€the€proven€behavior€of€the€wife€with€an€admitted€lesbian€isÍsufficient€to€disqualify€her€for€primary€custody€of€the€child.€€The€wife€denies€that€she€is€a€lesbian,Ïbut€admits€to€a€friendship€with€an€admitted€lesbian€and€that€she€(the€wife)€spent€several€nights€withÏthe€admitted€lesbian€during€the€marriage,€insists€that€association€with€an€admitted€lesbian€does€notÏdisqualify€her€to€act€as€principal€custodian€of€a€natural€child.€ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€detrimental€effect€of€lesbianism€upon€a€2€or€3€year€old€child€is€notÏshown€with€sufficient€clarity€to€justify€a€reversal€of€the€continued€shared€custody.ÌÌà àThe€wife€relies€upon€the€ð ðtender€yearsðð€doctrine€which€is€no€longer€recognized€as€dominantÏor€decisive€in€child€custody€cases.€€At€the€time€of€the€entry€of€the€orders€under€review,€TCA€ðð€36„6„101(d)€provided:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà àIt€is€the€legislative€intent€that€the€gender€of€the€partyÏseeking€custody€shall€not€give€rise€to€a€presumption€ofÏparental€fitness€or€cause€a€presumption€in€favor€or€againstÏthe€award€of€custody€to€such€party;€provided,€that€in€the€caseÏof€a€child€of€tender€years,€the€gender€of€the€parent€may€beÏconsidered€by€the€court€as€a€factor€in€determining€custodyÏafter€an€examination€of€the€fitness€of€each€party€seekingÏcustody.ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àThe€legislative€mandate€to€determine€the€relative€fitness€of€each€contending€parent€preservesÏthe€broad€discretion€of€divorce€courts€to€preserve€and€protect€the€best€interest€of€minor€children€inÏawarding€custody€or€visitation.ÌÌà àTCA€ðð€36„6„106€(1995)€provides€the€following€factors€to€be€considered€in€determiningÏfitness€for€custody:ÌÒ ¸ ÒÒ ` ÒÓÓà à(1)à àThe€love,€affection€and€emotional€tiesÍexisting€between€the€parents€and€child;ÌÌà à(2)à àThe€disposition€of€the€parents€to€provide€theÏchild€with€food,€clothing,€medical€care,€education€and€otherÏnecessary€care€and€the€degree€to€which€a€parent€has€been€theÏprimary€care€giver;ÌÌà à(3)à àThe€importance€of€continuity€in€the€childððsÏlife€and€the€length€of€time€the€child€has€lived€in€a€stable,Ïsatisfactory€environment;ÌÌà à(4)à àThe€stability€of€the€family€unit€of€the€parents;ÌÌà à(5)à àThe€mental€and€physical€health€of€the€parents;ÌÌà à(6)à àThe€home,€school€and€community€record€ofÏthe€child;ÌÌà à(7)à àThe€reasonable€preference€of€the€child€ifÏtwelve€(12)€years€of€age€or€older.€€The€court€may€hear€theÏpreference€of€a€younger€child€upon€request.€€The€preferencesÏof€older€children€should€normally€be€given€greater€weightÏthan€those€of€younger€children;ÌÌà à(8)à àEvidence€of€physical€or€emotional€abuse€toÏthe€child,€to€the€other€parent€or€to€any€other€person;€andÌÌà à(9)à àThe€character€and€behavior€of€any€otherÏperson€who€resides€in€or€frequents€the€home€of€a€parent€andÏsuch€personððs€interactions€with€the€child.ÌÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓÓÌà àNeither€party€to€the€present€proceeding€represents€an€ideal€candidate€for€child€custody.€ÏHowever,€neither€is€shown€to€be€disqualified.€€The€best€interests€of€the€child€do€not€appear€to€haveÏbeen€fully€developed.€€The€distance€between€the€residences€of€the€parties€is€a€formidable€difficultyÏin€the€transfer€of€physical€custody.€€The€effect€of€these€difficulties€upon€the€well„being€of€the€childÏis€not€sufficiently€explored€in€the€present€record€to€enable€this€Court€to€make€a€satisfactoryÏdetermination€of€the€issue,€which€should€be€the€subject€of€a€further€hearing€and€determination€byÏthe€Trial€Court.€€With€this€exception€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€thisÍappeal€are€assessed€equally€against€the€parties,€that€is,€each€party€shall€pay€one„half€of€same.€TheÏcause€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€for€further€proceedings€in€conformity€with€this€opinion,Ïincluding€a€further€hearing€and€determination€of€that€plan€of€custody€and€visitation€which€is€for€theÏbest€interest€of€the€minor€child.ÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓò òà àAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌWITH€INSTRUCTIONSó óÌÓ  ÓÓÓÌÓÓœ›à àà àà àà àà à___________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONà àÌÌÌœCONCUR:›ÌœÌ›œ›Ì_____________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌ̛̜̜DISSENT€IN€SEPARATE€OPINION:›ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÓÓÌÔ€Ô