ÿWPC ?C£5TKNtŠ uú‰Dq{©%®ÍzÁÍy6ñӲЊMÄf i3ÆI©}RÙ¡ªüÆäv- †*^äú® ×qÀ³äFUs…Å­|3@çè>s“´Ç¡8ø“¸;ž¾Ò ª=ÝÍ.ÊŽX=Ø2AÖ1‰qù>‚VŠœqpHíðYÛÄ`îcLK‘öÀÌÍBtp§?¶œàÕž:>B_5e×íVe@^¬«º3–•°î¿áE Í’×­àg¼žxª —>)®#ñpï"òNv8Aà7¹Àź=2–à›°ƒ4mŸ%’@ÁÔ¸d4ôcŽD- ‹íšZ:7çøA ÙÆ†%°T¼œ>ú[KÝåC×ó/šWo)hñ¯ ¢L¸ðß Å[Ù»² à%ÑžÄu«3 µ0î´HÀ¼jeIµu^X"²<¢øüãõš¯5'0ofž7ÎÊæØ¾¬±õR2 h¯Fr*ÄAûëú±G¢XÁ홥Ô0aÒy͸ð% eœv­‰Ú©è²ðœvâÜ„q6Ñ®T­¾ÿX-Ù|„"%ýØ…{Åsí@™ëS®z¾Ì JÑÿ„TÓ[R“¶6wNÁó’÷Qñ˜ðù7 %oØ{4b#Á\ % U N# 0ˆq U Nù ^ G wS zW ÒÑ 4£ · Æ mÈ Æß Æ¥ Æk Æ1÷NÿÿÿEb 0ë     Böö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c˜HP LaserJet 4Si,ü,,,,,ü0»(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularŠÿ(L  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÚ‹F'bk1ÈÑŸ3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 - ù-(|G2¦Ô$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·ü»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X¶#X»»Ô d(|3-$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·ü»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3-$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·ü»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·ü»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼·ü»»»ÔÔ€¼/ô»»¼·üÔÑ8€¶#XXdð»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@¦ ¦ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@ŠŠ$ìàAT€NASHVILLE€ˆÐ  Ðà@‰‰"ìàMay€2000€SessionˆÐ Ô$ ÐÔ‡XaˆX»¼/ôÔÌò òÔ#†¼/ô»XXaˆÆ#ÔÓ  ÓKELLYE€WAIR€WILSON€òòóóv.€PAUL€DAVID€WILSONòòóóÔ‡XaˆX»¼/ôÔó óÐ Ò" ÐÓ ÓÌà@6 6 ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyˆÐ Ò " Ðà@ ìàNo.€95D„3581€€€€€€Muriel€Robinson,€JudgeˆÐ ¾  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` A߈Ð ‚Ò  ÐÌà@2 2 ìàNo.€M1999„02045„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€July€31,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ԈР}Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<T` AßÐ U¥  Ðó óÌThis€is€an€appeal€from€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€modify€Mr.€Wilsonððs€child€support€obligation€afterÐ P   Ðhe€was€terminated€from€his€place€of€employment.€€We€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.Ð <Œ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Ð d ÐReversed€and€Remandedó óÐ P ÐÓ‹ÓÌòòBen€H.€Ô_ÔCantrellÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€M.S.Ô#†¼/ô»àXaˆK#ÔÔ‡XaˆX.¼/ôÔ,óó€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€B.€Cainóó€andÐ Ø( ÐòòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ä ÐÌDana€C.€McLendon€III,€Franklin,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Paul€David€Wilson.Ð œì ÐÌD.€Scott€Parsley,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Kellye€Wair€Wilson.Ð tÄ ÐÌà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼/ô»XXaˆ°#ÔÔ‡XaˆX»¼/ôԈРLœ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼/ô»XXaˆx#ÔÔ€XaˆX»¼/ôÔà  àIn€1996,€Ms.€Wilson€was€granted€a€divorce€from€Mr.€Wilson€on€the€grounds€of€inappropriateÐ $ t Ðmarital€conduct€on€Mr.€Wilsonððs€part.€€The€parties€had€one€child.€€In€the€final€decree€of€divorce,€Ms.Ð !`  ÐWilson€was€granted€primary€custody€of€the€child€and€Mr.€Wilson€was€ordered€to€pay€$1,135.00€inÐ ü!L! Ðchild€support€per€month€and€to€pay€the€childððs€insurance€premiums€as€well€as€all€uninsured€medicalÐ è"8" Ðand€dental€expenses.€€At€the€time€of€the€divorce€decree,€Mr.€Wilson€was€employed€as€the€businessÐ Ô#$# Ðmanager€of€a€car€dealership€and€earned€$121,562.65€that€year.€Ð À$ $ ÐÌà  àIn€October€of€1998,€Mr.€Wilsonððs€employment€was€terminated€after€accusations€that€he€soldÐ ˜&è!& Ðextended€warranties€to€customers€and€failed€to€tender€the€proceeds€from€those€warranties€to€the€carÐ „'Ô"' Ðdealership.€€Mr.€Wilson€subsequently€filed€a€petition€requesting€a€termination€or€reduction€in€childÐ p(À#( Ðsupport€until€he€is€able€to€obtain€new€employment.€€Ð \)¬$) ÐÌà  àA€hearing€was€held€in€May€of€1999€on€the€issue€of€reduction€of€child€support€and€anyÐ 4+„&+ Ðarrearages€due€and€owing€to€Ms.€Wilson.€€Mr.€Wilson,€the€only€witness€at€the€hearing,€testifiedÐ  ,p', Ðregarding€the€state€of€his€finances€since€the€termination€of€his€employment€in€October€of€1998.€€InÐ  -\(-ý' ÐJanuary€of€1999,€Mr.€Wilson€accepted€a€job€with€another€car€dealership€in€the€sales€and€leasingÐ ° Ðdepartment.€€This€job€had€a€salary€guarantee€of€only€$4,000.00€per€month.€€This€salary€guaranteeÐ œì Ðeffectively€meant€that€if€Mr.€Wilson€did€not€earn€the€entire€$4,000.00€in€commissions,€the€car€dealerÐ ˆØ Ðwould€loan€Mr.€Wilson€the€difference€between€the€amount€actually€earned€and€the€$4,000.00Ð tÄ Ðguaranteed€salary.€€At€the€time€of€trial,€Mr.€Wilson€had€borrowed€a€total€of€$7,200.00€from€the€carÐ `° Ðdealership€based€on€this€salary€guarantee€and€had€earned€an€additional€$9,544.13€in€commissions.€Ð L œ ÐMr.€Wilson€testified€that€he€was€unable€to€€afford€to€pay€his€current€household€expenses€and€otherÐ 8 ˆ Ðbills.€€In€addition,€Mr.€Wilson€had€taken€out€a€second€mortgage€on€his€home€and€was€behind€on€theÐ $ t Ðmortgage€payments.€€He€also€testified€that€he€had€charged€the€maximum€allowable€amount€on€atÐ  ` Ðleast€one€of€his€credit€cards€and€had€obtained€a€personal€loan€for€$15,000.00.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àAfter€hearing€the€proof,€the€trial€court€issued€an€order€finding€that€Mr.€Wilson€owed€childÐ Ô$  Ðsupport€arrearages€in€the€amount€of€$8,220.00.€€The€trial€court€further€found€that€Mr.€Wilson€wasÐ À  Ðð ðthe€maker€of€his€own€financial€troubles€as€a€result€of€his€dishonest€actions€at€his€former€place€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðemploymentðð€and€denied€Mr.€Wilsonððs€request€for€a€termination€or€reduction€in€child€support.€€Mr.Ð ˜è  ÐWilson€now€appeals.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWe€first€note€that€our€review€of€a€child€support€order€is€de€novo€on€the€record.€€The€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourtððs€findings€of€fact€are€presumed€correct€ð ðunless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€isÐ H˜ Ðotherwise.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€No€presumption€of€correctness€attaches€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ 4„ Ðconclusions€of€law.€€òòCarvell€v.€Bottomsóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€26€(Tenn.€1995).Ð  p ÐÌà  àIn€a€case€involving€the€modification€of€a€child€support€order,€the€proper€standard€is€theÐ øH Ðð ðsignificant€variance€testðð€adopted€by€the€General€Assembly€in€1994.€€òòTurner€v.€Turneróó,€919€S.W.2dÐ ä4 Ð340,€342„43€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€The€statute€provides€thatÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àIn€cases€involving€child€support,€upon€application€of€either€party,€the€court€shallÐ ¨ø Ðdecree€an€increase€or€decrease€of€such€allowance€when€there€is€found€to€be€aÐ ”ä Ðsignificant€variance,€as€defined€in€the€child€support€guidelines€.€.€.€between€theÐ €Ð Ðguidelines€and€the€amount€of€support€currently€ordered€unless€the€variance€hasÐ l¼ Ðresulted€from€a€previously€court„ordered€deviation€from€the€guidelines€and€theÐ X ¨ Ðcircumstances€which€caused€the€deviation€have€not€changed.ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„5„101(a)€(Supp.€1999).€€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àThe€child€support€guidelines€are€promulgated€by€the€Department€of€Human€Services€and€areÐ ô$D # Ðgenerally€based€on€a€flat€percentage€of€the€obligorððs€net€income.€€A€significant€variance€between€theÐ à%0!$ Ðamount€set€out€in€the€guidelines€and€the€current€support€obligation€is€defined€as€ð ðat€least€15%€if€theÐ Ì&"% Ðcurrent€support€is€one€hundred€dollars€($100.00)€or€greater€per€monthðð€and€ð ð[s]uch€variance€wouldÐ ¸'#& Ðjustify€the€modification€of€a€child€support€order€unless,€in€situations€where€a€downward€modificationÐ ¤(ô#' Ðis€sought,€the€obligor€is€willfully€and€voluntarily€unemployed€or€underemployed.ðð€€Tenn.€Comp.€R.Ð )à$( Ð&€Regs.€1240„2„4„.02(3).€€Where€an€obligor€is€willfully€and€voluntarily€unemployed€orÐ |*Ì%) Ðunderemployed,€child€support€is€calculated€based€on€a€determination€of€potential€income€asÐ h+¸&* Ðevidenced€by€the€obligorððs€educational€level€and/or€previous€work€experience.€€Tenn.€Comp.€R.€&Ð ° ÐRegs.€1240„2„4„.03(d).€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€the€case€at€bar,€the€evidence€established€that€at€the€time€of€the€divorce€decree€Mr.€WilsonÐ tÄ Ðwas€earning€approximately€$10,130.00€per€month.€€However,€at€the€time€of€trial,€Mr.€Wilson€wasÐ `° Ðearning€only€$4,000.00€per€month.€€Clearly€there€was€a€significant€variance€in€Mr.€Wilsonððs€income.€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àWe€must€next€determine€if,€in€spite€of€the€significant€variance€in€Mr.€Wilsonððs€income,€suchÐ $ t Ðvariance€is€a€result€of€willful€and€voluntary€unemployment€or€underemployment.€€The€evidenceÐ  ` Ðestablished€that€Mr.€Wilsonððs€employment€was€terminated€after€accusations€that€he€sold€warrantiesÐ ü L  Ðto€customers€and€failed€to€render€the€proceeds€of€those€warranties€to€his€employer.€€Although€Mr.Ð è 8  ÐWilson€had€not€been€indicted€as€of€the€time€of€the€trial,€exhibits€to€the€appellate€record€establish€thatÐ Ô$  Ðhe€later€pled€guilty€to€several€counts€of€theft€of€property.€€Ms.€Wilson€contends€that,€because€Mr.Ð À  ÐWilsonððs€criminal€actions€were€willful€and€voluntary,€he€is€willfully€and€voluntarily€underemployed.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àWe€do€not€think€that€any€time€an€Ô_ÔobligorÔ_Ô€parent€is€fired€for€misconduct€he€or€she€is€willfullyÐ „Ô  Ðunemployed€under€that€provision€of€the€child€support€guidelines.€€Although€there€is€no€requirementÐ pÀ Ðthat€a€parent€intended€to€avoid€their€child€support€obligations€by€their€actions,€we€do€think€thatÐ \¬ Ðwillful€or€voluntary€unemployment€or€underemployment€must€result€from€an€intent€on€the€part€ofÐ H˜ Ðthe€parent€to€reduce€or€terminate€his€or€her€income.€€òòSee€Ralston€v.€Ralstonóó,€No.€01A01„9804„CV„Ð 4„ Ð00222,€1999€WL€562719€at€ftn.€1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€3,€1999).€€There€is€nothing€in€the€record€toÐ  p Ðindicate€that€Mr.€Wilson€intended€to€lose€his€job€when€he€committed€these€criminal€acts,€and€òòóótheÐ  \ Ðrecord€establishes€that€he€had€little€or€no€choice€in€taking€a€lower€paying€job€after€the€allegations€ofÐ øH Ðtheft€were€made€against€him.€€Furthermore,€there€is€no€evidence€that€he€took€a€lower€paying€job€inÐ ä4 Ðorder€to€escape€his€child€support€obligation.€€In€light€of€the€foregoing,€we€find€that€the€record€doesÐ Ð  Ðnot€support€a€finding€that€Mr.€Wilson€was€willfully€or€voluntarily€unemployed€or€underemployed.€Ð ¼  ÐConsequently,€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€child€support€based€on€Mr.€Wilsonððs€potential€income€ratherÐ ¨ø Ðthan€his€actual€income€is€reversed.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€Mr.€Wilson€testified€that€he€was€earning€$4,000.00€per€month€in€income.€€However,Ð l¼ Ðthere€was€no€specific€finding€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€regarding€Mr.€Wilsonððs€actual€netÐ X ¨ Ðincome.€€Therefore,€we€remand€this€case€to€the€trial€court€to€determine€Mr.€Wilsonððs€actual€netÐ D!” Ðincome€and€make€an€award€of€child€support€based€on€this€income€rather€than€the€income€he€enjoyedÐ 0"€  Ðat€the€time€of€the€divorce.€€The€modification,€if€any,€would€relate€back€to€the€time€Mr.€WilsonððsÐ #l! Ðpetition€was€filed€in€November€of€1998.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed,€and€the€cause€remanded€to€the€Circuit€Court€forÐ à%0!$ ÐDavidson€County€for€any€further€proceedings€necessary.€€Tax€the€costs€on€appeal€to€the€appellee,Ð Ì&"% ÐKellye€Wair€Wilson.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à__________________________________________Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.Ð h+¸&* Ðà  à