ÿWPCt ¾Óñy¥¢ä±LG"/Îà,lá±ÄµYajc/§µ3ß«ŽÇJ‹_‰´!+Ú2$XäêîC|uwâeæ%iµ\cMÑ䟸•Øœà„;2nºõ8g¢ù€A\ëU¨fÓø‚sކËÞAèªMÉMW½¦q¹æG3X@ã¡‚ý˜‡ájÄ\eΚÏÞ¿åÎódî»NÀŒf×®›Š£S.³¬µŽf7 ‡¢RÁSÅÞMöº‚wlØýКˆåËN¸é“é†FÊÌŠ˜\œÄl©ÇZÆ·WTÒJmw9Šþ^cÔ¸²ÚÕÌå~þ<¸ C»­fžmÃÃÿ÷€òRÓH›÷ýú2BÆ?¡²¼\9”ï&¨r‹BÃ(ì#T°¢F­¥2KU“2ó7aç¨î®¥¦À˜13pÉÂ3ÆØkÞæ¨uÖ€lÖºEGY÷­‹•ª£Fè3è ]ûß8!l7ê £¶ãÒŠ¨% ½ Rþ͉ÊP :û¢$؇c•V¥4*ÛŸê‡U8%èäÕ‘&ÜA/®Þ\“Õsè! Ûîþ ÷µaizµXªa< n,…C§Wx²†I;É­Wr»ÀIj]ܬù\/É’Øybð?Ô:zö‘Êþ°ÔõÆ+V=ðŽ Ðor€upon€a€decrease€in€the€obligorððs€income€where€such€invasion€was€justified€by€specific€findingsÐ 'w Ðof€the€court.Ð ` ÐÌ€€à  àIn€the€case€now€before€us,€an€educational€trust€fund€has€been€separately€established€and€theÐ â2 Ðtrust€at€issue€has€been€established€for€the€sole€purpose€of€securing€Fatherððs€future€child€supportÐ Ë Ðobligation.€€Additionally,€the€trust€is€not€necessary€to€secure€Fatherððs€obligation€in€case€of€FatherððsÐ ´ Ðdeath€„€the€trial€court€ordered€Father€to€maintain€of€life€insurance€policy€for€this€purpose€(whichÐ í ÐFather€does€not€appeal).€€Rather,€it€anticipates€only€Fatherððs€inability€to€pay€child€support€at€theÐ †Ö Ðcurrent€amount€in€case€of€a€decrease€in€income.Ð o¿ ÐÌà  àIn€òòHuntley€v.€Huntleyóó,€this€Court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€a€portion€of€theÐ A‘ Ðobligorððs€child€support€obligation€should€be€placed€in€a€non„educational€trust.€€òòHuntley€v.€Huntleyóó,Ð *z Ð61€S.W.3d€329,€338€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001).€€Inòò€Huntleyóó,€however,€the€sums€directed€into€trust€wereÐ c Ðnot€funds€above€the€guideline€amounts€(then€21%€of€obligorððs€net€income€for€one€child).€€Rather,Ð üL Ðthe€òòHuntleyóó€court€determined€that€the€obligor€had€not€carried€his€burden€of€proving€a€downwardÐ å 5 Ðdeviation€from€the€guidelines€was€necessary,€but€ordered€that€his€child€support€obligation€be€splitÐ Î!  Ðbetween€direct€payments€to€the€custodial€parent€and€into€a€non„educational€trust.€€Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂÎt#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€òòId.Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂ’|#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€€óóThe€òòHuntleyóóÐ ·"! Ðcourt€opined:Ð  #ð" ÐÌà8  àWe€agree€that€the€duration€and€purpose€of€the€Trust€is€atypical€but€also€find€that€thereÐ r% $ Ðis€no€prohibition€against€this€type€of€Trust.€€When€the€obligor€has€a€net€monthlyÐ [&«!% Ðincome€in€excess€of€$10,000,€as€Defendant€does,€the€Guidelines€allow€funds€to€beÐ D'”"& Ðplaced€ð ðin€òòÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂÛ|#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔóóan€educationalòò€or€other€trust€óófund€for€the€benefit€of€the€child.ððÐ-(}#'Ð Ð  ÐÌÌâ âÐ è*8&* ÐÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂÀ~#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔòòId.óóÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂ#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€(citing€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€1240„2„4„.04(3))(emphasis€in€the€original).€€Thus,€the€òòHuntleyóóÐ ° Ðâ âcourt€ordered€payments€exceeding€those€based€on€an€income€of€$10,000€per€month€to€be€paid€intoÐ ™é Ðtrust.€€€Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà  àThe€present€case€is€distinguishable€from€òòHuntleyóó,€which€was€decided€before€the€amendmentÐ T¤ Ðto€the€guidelines€with€respect€to€high„income€obligors€become€effective.€€In€òòHuntleyóó,€the€court€didÐ =  Ðnot€deviate€from€the€guidelines,€but€simply€placed€a€portion€of€obligorððs€child€support€obligation€intoÐ & v Ða€trust€fund.€In€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€implicitly€has€deviated€from€the€guidelines,€imposingÐ  _ Ðon€Father€a€$5,000€per€month€child€support€obligation€in€excess€of€the€guideline€amount,€to€provideÐ ø H Ðfor€T.L.ððs€needs€in€the€case€of€Fatherððs€potential€income€reduction.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àThe€regulations€provide:Ð ³  ÐÌà8  àThe€court€may€require€that€sums€paid€above€the€percentage€applied€to€the€net€incomeÐ …Õ  Ðabove€Ten€Thousand€Dollars€($10,000)€per€month€be€placed€in€and€educational€òòorÐ n¾  Ðother€trust€fund€óófor€the€benefit€of€the€child€and€shall€make€a€written€finding€in€theÐ W§  Ðorder€supporting€the€basis€for€such€an€order.Ð@Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€1240„2„4„.04(3)(f)(emphasis€added).€€Clearly,€the€regulations€permitÐ b Ðtrusts€other€than€educational€trusts€in€situations€where€the€obligor€is€a€high„income€obligor€and€theÐ ûK Ðtrial€court€has€made€findings€supporting€the€need€for€such€a€trust.€€Although€the€regulations€do€notÐ ä4 Ðspecifically€provide€that€a€trust€may€be€established€solely€to€secure€future€child€support€payments,Ð Í Ðneither€do€they€proscribe€such€trusts€where€they€are€supported€by€the€circumstances.€€Additionally,Ð ¶ ÐòòLee€óóand€òòHuntleyóó€support€the€proposition€that€trusts€may€be€established€for€non„educational€purposes,Ð Ÿï Ðandòò€Lee€óósupports€the€proposition€that€trusts€may,€upon€specific€findings€of€the€court,€be€utilized€toÐ ˆØ Ðprovide€child€support€upon€a€decrease€in€the€obligorððs€income.Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€as€in€òòLeeóó,€where€the€obligor€parent€was€a€professional€basketball€player,€bothÐ C“ ÐFatherððs€income€and€risk€of€loss€of€employment€through€injury€or€ð ðearly€retirementðð€may€beÐ ,| Ðdescribed€as€ultra„high.€€We€recognize€that,€as€Father€asserts,€it€is€possible€that€any€high„incomeÐ e Ðobligor,€indeed,€any€obligor,€will€suffer€an€injury€or€income€reduction.€€However,€under€the€factsÐ þN Ðof€this€case,€we€believe€the€establishment€of€a€future€child€support€trust€is€warranted.€€FatherððsÐ ç 7 Ðstandard€of€living€likely€will€remain€high€in€light€of€his€substantial€current€income€notwithstandingÐ Ð!   Ða€decrease€in€future€income;€Fatherððs€profession€as€a€professional€football€player€unquestionablyÐ ¹" ! Ðpresents€a€high€risk€of€injury;€such€injury€likely€would€result€in€an€end€to€Fatherððs€current€career€andÐ ¢#ò" Ðin€a€loss€of€future€income;€and€T.L.€unquestionably€will€need€future€child€support€to€meet€even€basicÐ ‹$Û# Ðneeds.€€Moreover,€the€trust€presents€no€financial€burden€to€Father,€and€any€amounts€remaining€inÐ t%Ä $ Ðthe€trust€will€revert€to€Father€upon€T.L.ððs€reaching€the€age€of€majority.€Ð ]&­!% ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€Father,€however,€that€the€trial€courtððs€order€that€Father€pay€$5,000€per€monthÐ /(#' Ðinto€a€future€child€support€trust€for€an€unspecified€length€of€time€(presumably€for€the€duration€ofÐ )h$( ÐFatherððs€child€support€obligation)€is€not€appropriate.€€Such€payment€would€result€in€a€trust€that€farÐ *Q%) Ðexceeds€Fatherððs€total€child€support€obligation.€€We€accordingly€modify€the€trial€courtððs€order€andÐ ê*:&* Ðorder€Father€to€pay€$5,000€per€month€into€the€future€child€support€trust€until€such€time€as€the€amountÐ Ó+#'+ Ðin€the€trust€equals€the€amount€of€Fatherððs€remaining€child€support€obligation.€€We€remand€for€aÐ ° Ðdetermination€of€this€payment€period.€€Additionally,€in€light€of€the€trial€courtððs€order€that€FatherÐ ™é Ðmaintain€life€insurance€to€secure€his€child€support€obligation€in€the€case€of€his€death,€we€order€thatÐ ‚Ò Ðany€amounts€remaining€in€the€trust€in€the€event€of€Fatherððs€death€before€T.L.€reaches€the€age€ofÐ k» Ðmajority€will€revert€to€Fatherððs€estate€upon€receipt€of€life€insurance€benefits€by€Mother.€Ð T¤ ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòInterest€óóÐ & v Ðó óÓN“ÓÌà  àMother€asserts€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€award€interest€on€the€award€of€retroactiveÐ ÷ G Ðchild€support.€€The€code€provides,€in€pertinent€part:Ð à 0  ÐÌà8  àIf€the€full€amount€of€child€support€is€not€paid€by€the€date€upon€which€the€orderedÐ ²  Ðsupport€is€due,€the€unpaid€amount€is€in€arrears€and€shall€become€a€judgment€for€theÐ ›ë  Ðunpaid€amounts€and€shall€accrue€interest€from€the€date€of€the€arrearage€at€the€rate€ofÐ „Ô  Ðtwelve€percent€(12%)€per€annum.€€All€interest€which€accumulates€on€arrearages€shallÐ m½  Ðbe€considered€child€support.ÐV¦ Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)(5)(2001).€€€Motherððs€argument,€as€we€perceive€it,€is€that,€upon€theÐ (x Ðtrial€courtððs€award€of€retroactive€child€support,€she€become€entitled€to€12%€interest€per€annum€onÐ a Ðthe€child€support€amounts€payable€for€each€year.€Ð úJ ÐÌà  àIn€his€reply€brief,€Father€asserts€Mother€waived€this€issue€by€failing€to€raise€it€in€the€trialÐ Ì Ðcourt.€€A€party€may€not€raise€an€issue€for€the€first€time€upon€appeal.€òò€Cantrell€v.€Walker€Die€Casting,Ð µ ÐInc.óó,€121€S.W.3d€391,€396€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2003).€€Upon€review€of€the€record,€we€find€the€issue€of€Ð žî Ðinterest€was€not€raised€in€the€trial€court€and,€therefore,€has€been€waived.€€We€accordingly€declineÐ ‡× Ðto€address€the€merits€of€this€issue.Ð pÀ ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòAttorneyððs€Fees€and€Costs€óóó óÐ B’ ÐÓ°™ÓÌà  àMother€contends€the€trial€erred€by€failing€to€award€her€all€of€her€attorneyððs€fees€and€litigationÐ c Ðexpenses€incurred€in€preparing€and€prosecuting€her€child€support€petition.€€She€asserts€these€costsÐ üL Ðamounted€to€$24,575.05,€and€that€Father€did€not€object€to€the€reasonableness€of€this€sum.€€The€trialÐ å 5 Ðcourt€awarded€Mother€$15,000€ð ðas€that€just€portion€of€Petitionerððs€(Motherððs)€attorney€fees€andÐ Î!  Ðlitigation€expenses.ðð€€òòÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂÚ#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔóóFather€does€not€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€Motherððs€attorneyððsÐ ·"! Ðfees.€€Father€asserts€the€amount€of€attorneyððs€fees€requested€by€Mother€is€unreasonable€and€that€theÐ  #ð" Ðtrial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€determining€the€amount€of€Motherððs€reasonable€attorneyððsÐ ‰$Ù# Ðfees.€€Ð r% $ ÐÌà  àÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂ>œ#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔAn€award€of€reasonable€attorneyððs€fees€is€appropriate€when€the€services€of€a€parent's€attorneyÐ D'”"& Ðinures€to€the€benefit€of€a€minor€child.€€òòDalton€v.€Daltonóó,€858€S.W.2d€324,€327€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð -(}#' Ð1993).€€We€review€an€award€of€attorneyððs€fees€under€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€Ô#†XÄÃXXXéž#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€òòId.Ô#†XÄÃXXX雟#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€€óóÔ#†XÄÃXXXéÂäŸ#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔUponÐ )f$( Ðreview€of€the€record,€we€note€that€as€of€July€7,€2003,€Motherððs€attorneyððs€fees€and€expenses€wereÐ ÿ)O%) Ð$12,155.59.€€Additionally€fees€of€$1,973.50€were€incurred€on€July€8€and€9€in€conjunction€with€theÐ è*8&* Ðhearing€of€this€matter€on€July€9.€€The€remainder€of€the€$24,575.05€submitted€by€Motherððs€counselÐ Ñ+!'+ Ðwas€incurred€post„trial.€€We€cannot€say€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€awarding€MotherÐ ° Ðattorneyððs€fees€of€$15,000.Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂ+ #ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔ€€Ð ™é ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòAttorneyððs€Fees€on€Appeal€óóó óÐ k» ÐÓº¢ÓÌà  àMother€requests€attorneys€fees€on€appeal.€€This€court€repeatedly€has€recognized€that€whenÐ < Œ Ðthe€obligor€parent€appeals€an€award€of€child€support,€€ð ð[t]he€allowance€of€attorneyððs€fees€for€[anÐ % u Ðappeal]€is€for€the€benefit€of€the€child,€and€the€custodial€spouse€should€not€have€to€bear€the€expenseÐ  ^ Ðincurred€on€the€childððs€behalf.ðð€€òòHuntley€v.€Huntleyóó,€61€S.W.3d€329,€341€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ÷ G Ð2001)(quoting€òòRagan€v.€Raganóó,€858€S.W.2d€332,€334€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993)).€€We€award€MotherÐ à 0  Ðreasonable€attorneyððs€fees€incurred€on€appeal.€€We€remand€to€the€trial€court€for€determination€of€theÐ É   Ðamount€of€such€reasonable€fees.Ð ²  ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòConclusion€óóó óÐ „Ô  ÐÓ&¦ÓÌà  àThe€dissent€would€hold€that€an€upward€deviation€from€the€child€support€guidelines€isÐ U¥  Ðwarranted€in€this€case€for€both€retroactive€and€prospective€child€support.€€Like€the€dissent,€we€areÐ >Ž Ðnot€insensitive€to€the€disparate€financial€circumstances€of€the€parties€in€this€case.€€Clearly,€FatherÐ 'w Ðenjoys€a€life„style€far€more€lavish€than€that€of€Mother.€€However,€the€trial€courtððs€award€ofÐ ` Ðretroactive€child€support€was€based€on€an€erroneous€application€of€law€and€not€a€finding€of€need€inÐ ùI Ðexcess€of€the€guideline€amounts.€€Retroactive€child€support€awards€recognize€that€a€parentððs€dutyÐ â2 Ðof€support€begins€with€the€birth€of€the€child,€and€the€child€support€guidelines€provide€a€presumptiveÐ Ë Ðmeasure€of€the€award€amount.€€Ô#†XÄÃXXX郢#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔòòBerryhill€v.€Rhodesóó,€21€S.W.3d€188,€193€(Tenn.€2000).€€Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂù©#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔMotherÐ ´ Ðfailed€to€demonstrate€expenses€exceeding€the€amount€of€child€support€required€by€the€guidelines,Ð í Ðand€no€amount€of€retroactive€support€can€alter€the€conditions€under€which€T.L.€previously€lived.€Ð †Ö ÐThe€award€of€retroactive€child€support€mandated€by€this€Opinion€is€the€statutory€amount;€it€willÐ o¿ Ðenable€Mother€to€achieve€her€stated€goal€of€purchasing€a€home€in€a€more€affluent€area;€and€it€willÐ X¨ Ðcompensate€her€for€expenses€Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂxª#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔincurred€on€T.L.ððs€behalf.€Ð A‘ ÐÌà  àThe€dissent€further€points€to€Fatherððs€lack€of€visitation€as€warranting€an€upward€deviationÐ c Ðfrom€the€guidelines.€€In€providing€criteria€for€deviation,€the€guidelines€state,Ð üL ÐÌà8  à(b)€If€the€child(ren)€is/are€not€staying€overnight€with€the€obligor€for€the€averageÐ Î!  Ðvisitation€period€of€every€other€weekend€from€Friday€evening€to€Sunday€evening,Ð ·"! Ðtwo€weeks€during€the€summer€and€two€weeks€during€holiday€periods€throughout€theÐ  #ð" Ðyear,€then€an€amount€shall€be€added€to€the€percentage€calculated€in€the€above€rule€toÐ ‰$Ù# Ðcompensate€the€obligee€for€the€cost€of€providing€care€for€the€child(ren)€for€theÐ r% $ Ðamount€of€time€during€the€average€visitation€period€that€the€child(ren)€is/are€not€withÐ [&«!% Ðthe€obligor€[reference€1240-2-4-.02(6)].€The€court€may€consider€a€downwardÐ D'”"& Ðdeviation€from€the€guidelines€if€the€obligor€demonstrates€that€he/she€is€consistentlyÐ -(}#' Ðproviding€more€care€and€supervision€for€the€children€than€contemplated€in€the€rule.Ð)f$(Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€1240-2-4-.04(1)(b).€€It€is€not€disputed€that,€in€this€case,€Father€has€spentÐ è*8&* Ðvery€little€visitation€time€with€T.L.€€However,€the€issue€here€becomes€how€this€provision€is€to€beÐ Ñ+!'+ Ðapplied€in€light€of€section€36„5„101(e)(1)(B)(2001)€and€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&€Regs.€1240„2„4„.04(3).€Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂȬ#ÔÔ‡XéÂXXXÄÃÔÐ ° ÐIn€resolving€apparent€conflicts€between€the€statutes,€the€courts€must€seek€to€provide€for€ð ðaÐ ™é Ðharmonious€operation€of€the€laws."€€òòHolder€v.€Tennessee€Judicial€Selection€Comm'nóó,€937€S.W.2dÐ ‚Ò Ð877,€883€(Tenn.1996)€(quoting€òòBoone€v.€Sundquistóó,€884€S.W.2d€438,€444€(Tenn.€1994)).€€In€thisÐ k» Ðcase,€although€the€guidelines€clearly€permit€and€provide€the€basis€for€an€upward€deviation€based€onÐ T¤ Ðreduced€visitation,€the€trial€court€found€that€base€child€support€in€excess€of€the€guidelineÐ =  Ðpresumptive€amount€of€$2100€per€month€was€not€necessary€despite€the€undisputed€fact€of€reducedÐ & v Ðvisitation.€€The€trial€court€determined,€however,€that€a€deviation€was€warranted€insofar€as€necessaryÐ  _ Ðto€provide€for€private€school€education,€an€educational€trust,€and€a€future€support€trust.€€TheÐ ø H Ðevidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings.Ð á 1  Ѐ€Ð Ê   Ðà  àIn€light€of€the€foregoing,€this€matter€is€affirmed€as€modified.€€We€remand€to€the€trial€courtÐ ³  Ðfor€modifications€consistent€with€this€Opinion.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€one„half€to€TieranyÐ œì  ÐRedmond,€Appellee€and€one„half€to€Cletidus€Marquell€Hunt,€Appellant,€and€his€surety,€for€whichÐ …Õ  Ðexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô#†XÄÃXXXéÂ%³#ÔÐ n¾  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð b Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEÐ ûK ÐÌ