WPC& hVsr ~162M՟"ޗ>*kZ7f0 BIXϚK<S #-.Yz"9)>)bd !81A-D V5[𾼐#@y߅[Lч|cYƖio{T1SV-H+?bzt@#,& uv48NH)w!\#7IEfCd%q2uR]wqԴh2?3ԁCX?}x`bN⶟S)+y_{~BԎY,wS٭yᏍJc(RLSYZ2TqT%`SMkW!+v j-;#i2ov,z !׀5o|m 5ϙ6Ga~o?8΍4K7C}n   [ !U NN5UN7 1uE 72b...............966 0Do 1^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^!^! 0!!!! B"" 0" D3# D-# 0K## AS<$$ 0U% 0D% A=&HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6,,,,0=y%-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular9,GRA~1ݤ 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.wpt3|xU\  `&Times New RomanLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)- - / R$      2  -  _--Section36-5-101(d)(1)provides:  8  Itistheintentofthegeneralassemblythataspousewhoiseconomicallydisadvantaged,relativeto 8 theotherspouse,berehabilitatedwheneverpossiblebythegrantingofanorderforpaymentof L rehabilitative,temporarysupportandmaintenance.Wherethereissuchrelativeeconomic  disadvantageandrehabilitationisnotfeasibleinconsiderationofallrelevantfactors,includingthose  setoutinthissubsection,thenthecourtmaygrantanorderforpaymentofsupportandmaintenance H  onalong-termbasisoruntilthedeathorremarriageoftherecipient....Rehabilitativesupportand  \ maintenanceisaseparateclassofspousalsupportasdistinguishedfromalimonyinsolidoandperiodic   alimony.Indeterminingwhetherthegrantingofanorderforpaymentofsupportandmaintenanceto     apartyisappropriate,andindeterminingthenature,amount,lengthofterm,andmannerofpayment,  thecourtshallconsiderallrelevantfactors,including:t   8  (A)Therelativeearningcapacity,obligations,needs,andfinancialresourcesofeachparty, 8 includingincomefrompension,profitsharingorretirementplansandallothersources;L   8  (B)Therelativeeducationandtrainingofeachparty,theabilityandopportunityofeachpartyto  securesucheducationandtraining,andthenecessityofapartytosecurefurthereducationandtraining  toimprovesuchparty'searningcapacitytoareasonablelevel;H      (C)Thedurationofthemarriage;  \   (D)Theageandmentalconditionofeachparty;   8  (E)Thephysicalconditionofeachparty,including,butnotlimitedto,physicaldisabilityor    incapacityduetoachronicdebilitatingdisease;X     8  (F)Theextenttowhichitwouldbeundesirableforapartytoseekemploymentoutsidethehome  l  becausesuchpartywillbecustodianofaminorchildofthemarriage; 0    8  (G)Theseparateassetsofeachparty,bothrealandpersonal,tangibleandintangible;    8  (H)Theprovisionsmadewithregardtothemaritalpropertyasdefinedin36-4-121;h    8  (I)Thestandardoflivingofthepartiesestablishedduringthemarriage;,|    8  (J)Theextenttowhicheachpartyhasmadesuchtangibleandintangiblecontributionstothe @  marriageasmonetaryandhomemakercontributions,andtangibleandintangiblecontributionsbya   partytotheeducation,trainingorincreasedearningpoweroftheotherparty;x    8  (K)Therelativefaultofthepartiesincaseswherethecourt,initsdiscretion,deemsitappropriate < todoso;andP   8  (L)Suchotherfactors,includingthetaxconsequencestoeachparty,asarenecessarytoconsider  theequitiesbetweentheparties.   Ѐ L Tenn.CodeAnn.36-5-101(d)(1)(Supp.2000). ` #--~#(#$  0    R$      1  -  _WhilewefindthetrialcourtsorderthatDr.Sullivanpayhisownattorneysfeesoutofhisportionofthe  proceedsfromthemaritalhomeunusual,Dr.Sullivandoesnotraisethisasanissueonappealandwethereforedonot t addressithere.(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(|G2$ !.8RdXXd8         0  - d(|3b$ !.8RdXXd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3b$ !.8RdXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Rdd8     _  R8iXXdd8  @ C$RINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#RC$ #Ԉ &   August7,2002Session L XiXR #RXXi#KENNETHW.SULLIVANv.LINDAR.SULLIVANXiXR  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforWilliamsonCounty  J @@No.26667Russ_Heldman_,Chancellor  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200103025_COA_ԄR3CVFiledSeptember5,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      XiXXXiThisappealarisesfromadivorceaction.Theplaintiff/appellantappealsthedivisionofmarital x  property,awardofalimonyinfuturo,amountofalimony,andawardofattorneysfees.Weaffirm d theawardofalimonyasmodifiedherein,affirmthedivisionofproperty,andreversetheawardof P attorneysfees. <  #XiXX Xi##RXXih#XiXRTenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmedinpart d asmodified,Reversedinpart;andRemanded  P   #RXi#XiX.RDavidR.Farmer,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichW.FrankCrawford,P.J.,W.S., ( andHollyK.Lillard,J.,joined.  PatriciaR.Young,Brentwood,Tennessee,fortheappellant,KennethW.Sullivan.  ErnestW.WilliamsandAnnaE.Freeman,Franklin,Tennessee,fortheappellee,LindaR.Sullivan. t  OPINION #RXXi#XiXR L  #RXXi #  XiXR XiXXXi   KennethandLindaSullivanweremarriedin1976andhavetwoadultchildren.Mrs. $"t! SullivanholdsaBSineducationandhomeeconomics,withafocusoninteriordesign.Dr.Sullivan #`" isafamilypracticephysician.ThecouplespentmostoftheirmarriedlifeinLouisiana,relocating #L# toTennesseein1995.Thecouplewasseparatedandreconciledtwicepriortothisaction,including $8 $ a1999separationduringwhichMrs.SullivanfiledfordivorceinTennessee. %$!%   InSeptemberof1999,Dr.Sullivanfiledacomplaintfordivorceallegingirreconcilable '"' differencesand/orinappropriatemaritalconduct.Mrs.Sullivanadmittedirreconcilabledifferences, (#( deniedinappropriateconduct,andcountercomplainedonthegroundsofadulteryandcrueland )$) inhumantreatment.Mrs.Sullivansoughtpermanentalimony(includingmedicalinsurance), p*%* paymentbyDr.Sullivanofalldebts,andattorneysfees.Dr.Sullivanadmittedtohavinga \+&+  relationshipafterthepartiesseparation,butdeniedotherfaultallegations.Themaritalhomewas H,', soldinDecemberof1999andtheproceedsweredepositedwiththeWilliamsonCountyClerkand  Master.     WhenDr.Sullivanfiledhiscomplaint,hewasemployedasaphysicianbytheFranklin t MedicalCenterwithabasesalaryof$135,000.TheCenterclosedinAprilof2000andDr.Sullivan ` beganaprivatepracticewhichlost$68,000in2000.InAprilof2001,Dr.Sullivanaccepteda L  positionwithapainmanagementclinicatasalaryof$110,000.Hesubmitsthatthedebtsfromhis 8  privatepracticewere$93,000.Mrs.Sullivanworkedearlyinthemarriage,andhasworkedparttime $ t ininteriordesign.Mrs.Sullivansuffersfrom_scoliosis_Ԁandarthritis,andhasundergoneseveral  ` surgeriestoherfeet.Dr.Sullivansuffersfrombackproblemsandhasmildcoronaryarterydisease.  L      ThetrialcourtgrantedMrs.Sullivanadivorcebasedonadulteryandinappropriatemarital $  conduct.ThecourtawardedMrs.Sullivanlongtermalimonyof$3,500permonthuntildeath,   remarriageorage65,plusmedicalinsurancepremiums.Dr.Sullivanwasorderedtomaintainalife   insurancepolicyof$350,000,withMrs.Sullivandesignatedasthebeneficiary.Thecourtawarded   eachpartytheirseparateproperty.Mrs.Sullivanreceivedmaritalpropertyvaluedat$139,069.The   courtallocateddebtof$7,062toMrs.Sullivan.Dr.Sullivanwasawardedpropertyvaluedat p $120,706,includingacreditof$16,758for _pendente_Ԁlite support.Dr.Sullivanwasallocated \ $153,357ofdebt.Thecourtfurtherallocated$17,000oftheproceedsfromthesaleofthemarital H hometopayMrs.Sullivansattorneysfees,and$10,000oftheproceedstopayDr.Sullivans 4 attorneysfees.@ ?#  1      ׀  p    Issues H   Dr.Sullivanraisesthefollowingissues,asweperceivethem,forourreview:   8   ` (1)Whetherthecourterredbyawardingpermanentalimonyratherthan  rehabilitativealimony.   8  0`   (2)Whethertheawardofalimonyisexcessive.d` `  8  0`   (3)Whetherthepropertyawardisequitable.#XiXXXiTheCodeprovidesthatin l determininganequitabledistributionofproperty,thetrialcourtshallconsider: X 8   ` (1)Thedurationofthemarriage;0   8   ` (2)Theage,physicalandmentalhealth,vocationalskills,employability, l earningcapacity,estate,financialliabilitiesandfinancialneedsofeachofthe X parties;D   8   ` (3)Thetangibleorintangiblecontributionbyone(1)partytothe 0 education,trainingorincreasedearningpoweroftheotherparty;   8   ` (4)Therelativeabilityofeachpartyforfutureacquisitionsofcapital  assetsandincome;   8   ` (5)Thecontributionofeachpartytotheacquisition,preservation,  appreciation,depreciationordissipationofthemaritalorseparateproperty, | includingthecontributionofapartytothemarriageasahomemaker,wageearner h orparent,withthecontributionofapartyasahomemakerorwageearnertobe T  giventhesameweightifeachpartyhasfulfilleditsrole;@!   8   ` (6)Thevalueoftheseparatepropertyofeachparty;,"|    8   ` (7)Theestateofeachpartyatthetimeofthemarriage;#h!   8   ` (8)Theeconomiccircumstancesofeachpartyatthetimethedivisionof $T" propertyistobecomeeffective;$@ #   8   ` (9)Thetaxconsequencestoeachparty,costsassociatedwiththe %,!$ reasonablyforeseeablesaleoftheasset,andotherreasonablyforeseeable &"% expensesassociatedwiththeasset;'#&   8   ` (10)Theamountofsocialsecurityavailabletoeachspouse;and(#'   8   ` (11)Suchotherfactorsasarenecessarytoconsidertheequitiesbetween )$( theparties.#XiXXXi>#XiXXXix*%)    d+&* ЇTenn.CodeAnn.364121(c)(2001).#XiXXXi!H# XiXXXiԀFaultisexpresslynottoberegardedinthedivisionof  property.Tenn.CodeAnn.364121(a)(1)(2001).#XiXX XiH#XiXXXiTrialcourtsarevestedwithagreatdealof  discretionwhenclassifyinganddividingthemaritalestate,andtheirdecisionsareentitledto t greatweightonappeal. Goodmanv.Goodman ,8S.W.3d289,298(Tenn.Ct.App.1999). ` Accordingly,unlessthecourtsdecisioniscontrarytothepreponderanceoftheevidenceoris L  basedonanerroroflaw,wewillnotinterferewiththedecisiononappeal. Id. #XiXXXiI# XiXXXi 8    ThetrialcourtawardedMrs.Sullivanmaritalpropertyvaluedatapproximately$139,069.  ` Thecourtallocateddebtof$7,062toMrs.Sullivan.Dr.Sullivanwasawardedpropertyvalued  L  at$120,706,includingacreditof$16,758for _pendente_Ԁlite support.Dr.Sullivanwasallocated  8  $153,357ofdebt,includingthe _pendente_Ԁlite supportamount,$93,000ofbusinessdebtincurred (  postseparation,and$10,067attachedtotheautomobilehewasawarded.Wenotethatthe   _Sullivans_primarymaritalassetwasthemaritalhome,whichwassoldfor$107,478.78.Mrs.   Sullivanwasawarded$80,478.78oftheproceedsfromthesaleofthehome;Dr.Sullivanwas   awardedproceedsof$27,000.Uponreviewoftherecord,andinconsiderationoftheforegoing   statutoryprovisions,thisCourtissatisfiedwiththedivisionofmaritalpropertyinthiscase.We x accordinglyaffirmonthisissue. d   AwardofAttorneysFees  < P  #XiXX XiK#XiXXXiInadivorcecase,anawardofattorney'sfeesistreatedasanawardofalimony. _Kinard_ , ` 986S.W.2dat235.Whendeterminingwhethertoawardattorney'sfees,thetrialcourtmust L considerthesamefactorsusedwhenconsideringarequestforalimony. _Kincaid_Ԁv._Kincaid_ ,912 8 S.W.2d140,144(Tenn.Ct.App.1995).Aswithalimony,needistheprimaryfactor. _Herrera_ $ v._Herrera_ ,944S.W.2d379,390(Tenn.Ct.App.1996).Anawardofattorney'sfeesisproper  whenonespouseisdisadvantagedanddoesnothavesufficientresourceswithwhichtopaythose  fees. Id. Thequestionsofwhethertoawardattorney'sfees,andtheamountthereof,arelargely  leftwithinthediscretionofthetrialcourt. Aaronv.Aaron ,909S.W.2d408,411(Tenn.1995).#XiXXXiKQ# XiXXXiԀ    ThetrialcourtawardedMrs.Sullivan$17,000ofattorneysfees.Thesefeeswereordered \  tobepaidfromthe$27,000Dr.Sullivanwasawardedfromtheproceedsofthemaritalhome.In H! lightofthedivisionofmaritalpropertyasdiscussedabove,wearesatisfiedthatMrs.Sullivan 4"  hassufficientresourceswithwhichtopayherattorneysfees.Wethereforereverseonthisissue.  #p! Mrs.Sullivansrequestforattorneysfeesincurredbythisappealaredenied.  $\"   Conclusion %4!$  qX  Theawardofalimony infuturo toMrs.Sullivanisaffirmedasmodifiedto$2,000per '#& monthuntildeathorremarriage.Thetrialcourtsdivisionofmaritalpropertyisaffirmed.The (#' awardofattorneysfeestoMrs.Sullivanisreversed.Costsofthisappealaretaxedonehalfto )$(  h+&* theappellee,LindaR.Sullivanandonehalftotheappellant,KennethW.Sullivan,andhis  surety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  #XiXX XiU#   `     h     ___________________________________ t    `     h     DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE