WPC wN5ZԾ۴@š%_;֖Z*Eh?$3@@VZ=1-95 a0:M5Hb?~{!\iq2bbg5*[u;"2Qޅuwz[ɉs,k2%2:u `;41Ӕ~&yh;IYs6^+np:+< )d!Q!JIu0ΟrIn7; w5Z화"[>U/4V1 mǔμnSY^3U>$PK1mvEY q@ t!kؕ7^迊R _^/8HpP<6pS26߹Ű_l "nLC[ 4 :'*cЯ;@wW7BW: Z7Բ'.l-]S++=f4pk!:,b#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz z  W   UNN 0Dp=Ev7b 0 B 0 D3z D- 0K AS%x 0> 0D A&HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e,,,,0Hi/) (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular~&)Ρ C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(uH Z6Times New Roman Regular(#$  0   f R$      1    _Dr.Barnettfileda_counterpetition_Ԁforareductioninchildsupportandalimonyandforanincreaseinvisitation.  WeaffirmtheCourtofAppealsdispositionoftheseissues.  R$      2    _ [T]he_parentwithwhomthechild(ren)liveprimarilywillbereferredtoastheobligeeandtheparent_Ԁwith  whomthechild(ren)donotprimarilylivewillbereferredtoastheobligor.Tenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch. t 1240!2!4!.03(1).  R$      3    _Otherreasonsrequiringanupwarddeviationincludesituationsinwhichtheparentpayingsupportisnot  providinghealthinsuranceforthechildren;ifthechildrenarenotstayingovernightwiththeparentpayingsupportfor t theaveragevisitationperiodsetforth_in_ԀTenn.Comp.R.&Regs._ch._Ԁ_1240!2!4!.02(6);_Ԁanyotherextraordinaryexpenses 8 forthechildren ifthecourtfindsthatequityrequiresit.Tenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.04(1)(a),(b)&(d). - R$      4    __Any_Ԁdeparturefromtheguidelinesmustbejustifiedbyspecific,preferablywritten,findingsbythetrialcourt  thatstrictapplicationoftheguidelineswouldbeunjustorinappropriate.SeeTenn.CodeAnn._36-__5-101(e)(1);_ԀTenn. t Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.02(7). - -(|G2$ !.8^dd8         0   d(|3G$ !.8^dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$ !.8^dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8^dd8     _   8iXXdd81@ 21INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @tt$ATKNOXVILLE#12#Ԉ "   May2000Session D DC1 #1CD#ROBERT_McALISTER_ԀBARNETT,IIIv.PAULALYNNBARNETTDC1  : @@ AppealbyPermissionfromtheCourtofAppeals,EasternSection  2 ChanceryCourtforHamiltonCounty   @@No.63302L.MarieWilliams,Judge(byinterchange)   FORPUBLICATION   @@*AV) ` dE<n` A o  @@TTNo.E199700010SCR11CVFiledSeptember5,_2000_ g  AV) ` dE<8` A 9     DCCD#1CDћ#DC1Wegrantedthisappealtodetermine:1)whetherprivateschooltuitionconstitutesanextraordinary 1 educationalexpenseundertheTennesseeChildSupportGuidelines;and2)whetherthe_noncustodial_ j parentshouldberequiredtopaythoseexpensesinadditiontochildsupportbaseduponthepercentage S ofnetincomeofthe_noncustodial_Ԁparent.WeholdthatpursuanttotheTennesseeChildSupport < Guidelinesprivateschooltuitionisan extraordinaryeducationalexpense.Weaffirmthedecision % oftheCourtofAppealsrequiringthetotalamountofprivateschooltuitiontobepaidbytheobligor  father.Wehold,however,thatinappropriatecasesacourtmayapportiontheamountoftuition  betweentheparties.#DCCDA##1CDу#  5 Tenn.R.App.P.11AppealbyPermission;  JudgmentoftheCourtofAppealsAffirmed      1JaniceM.Holder,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichE.RileyAnderson,C.J.,andFrankF._Drowota_,III,  _Adolpho_ԀA.Birch,Jr.,andWilliamM.Barker,JJ.,joined. k D.MitchellBryant,Cleveland,Tennessee,andRussellTheodoreKing,Chattanooga,Tennessee,forappellant,Robert_McAlister_  /  Barnett,III. !! _Glenna_ԀM._Ramer_ԀandSandraJean_Bott_,Chattanooga,Tennessee,forappellee,PaulaLynnBarnett.  #]# 6   @@OO& OPINION #1 B #DC1 $% #1CDј #DC1  DCCD  BACKGROUND "&r!' :  PaulaLynnBarnett(Ms.Barnett)andRobert_McAlister_ԀBarnett,III (Dr.Barnett)weredivorced 'D#) in1986afterafourteenyearmarriage.Atthetimeofthedivorce,thepartiesson,Joshua,wasthree (-$*  yearsoldandtheirdaughter,Katie,wasaninfant.ThefinaldecreeofdivorcerequiredDr.Barnettto )%+ pay$500perweek($2,167permonth)inchildsupportand$300perweek($1,300permonth)in  periodicalimony.InMarch,1996,Ms.Barnettfiledapetitiontomodifythechildsupportaward._ #  1      _     ThetrialcourtfoundDr.Barnettsgross_income_Ԁtobe$209,206andsetchildsupportinthe k amountof$3,700permonth.Itordered$700ofthatamounttobepaidintoaneducationaltrustfor T Katie,withtheremaining$3,000tobepaiddirectlytoMs.Barnett.ThetrialcourtfoundthatJoshuas =  tuitionatMcCallie,aprivateschool,wasanextraordinaryeducationalexpense.Thecourt,however, & v orderedthetuitiontobepaidbyPaulaBarnettfromthe$3,000monthlychildsupport.  _   TheCourtofAppealsreversedthetrialcourtsruling.Itheldthatextraordinaryeducation  1  expensesmustbeadded_____to_Ԁthepercentageofnetincomerequiredbytheguidelinestobepaidbythe    obligor_ #  2      _Ԁparent.TheCourtofAppealsremandedtothetrialcourtforanawardofadditionalchild   supporttobepaidbyDr.BarnettbaseduponJoshuasextraordinaryeducationalexpenses.Forthe   reasonssetforthbelow,weaffirmtheCourtofAppeals.     @&ANALYSIS W    Wegrantedthisappealtodecidethefollowingissues: )y 8  DidtheCourt[ofAppeals]errinfindingprivateschooltuitiontobeanextraordinary K educationalexpenseandinfurtherrequiringthefathertopaythoseexpensesinaddition 4 toguidelineschildsupport?   Astheseissuesraisequestionsoflawonly,ourreviewisdenovowithnopresumptionofcorrectness.  SeeNashv.Mulle,846S.W.2d803,804(Tenn.1993).    ChildsupportinTennesseeisgovernedbyTenn.CodeAnn.36-5-101. Inmakingits Z determinationconcerningtheamountof___support_Ԁ_..__ԁ._Ԁthecourtshallapplyasarebuttablepresumption C thechildsupportguidelinesasprovidedinthissubsection.Tenn.CodeAnn.36-5-101(e)(1).Child ,| supportguidelineshavebeenpromulgatedbytheTennesseeDepartmentofHumanServicesand e adoptedbytheGeneralAssembly.Thepurposes,premises,guidelinesforcompliance,andcriteriafor N deviationfromtheguidelinescarrywhatamountstoalegislativemandate.SeeNash,846S.W.2dat  7 804. !     Theguidelinesarebaseduponaflatpercentageofthe_obligorsnet_Ԁ_income.The_Ԁincomeofthe #" _obligee____may_Ԁnotbeconsideredin thecalculationoforasareasonfordeviationfromtheguidelines $# indeterminingthesupportaward_amount____._ԀTenn.Comp.R.&_Regs_.ch.1240!2!4!.03(2).#DCCD#DCCDԀTheflat t% $ percentageimposed presumesthattheobligeewillbeexpendingatleastanequalpercentageofnet  incomeasthatoftheobligorforthesupportofthechildrenforwhomsupportissought.Id.  ________  Aftercomputingthe percentageamountofchildsupporttobe_paid,_Ԁatrialcourtmustconsider k thecriteriafordeviationfromguidelinessetforthinTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.04.Since T theguidelinesprovidethatthepercentageamountsareminimums,thecourt shallincreasetheaward =  calculatedinTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.03forseveralspecifiedreasons.Atissueinthis & v caseistheprovisionrequiringthat [e]xtraordinaryeducationalexpensesandextraordinarymedical  _ expensesnotcoveredbyinsuranceshallbeaddedtothepercentagecalculatedintheaboverule.Tenn.  H Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.04(1)(c). #  3        1  __  Theguidelinesappeartoequate extraordinarywith additionalor exceedingtheusual.   Forexample,theguidelinesrequiretheobligortopaythecostofhealthcareinsuranceforthechildren   inadditiontothecomputedpercentageofchildsupport.SeeTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.   1240!2!4!.04(1)(a).Theguidelinesthenstatethat extraordinarymedicalexpensesnotcoveredby n  insurancemustalsobeaddedtothepercentagecalculated.Itdoesnotappearthattheguidelines W  contemplateacategoryof ordinarymedicalexpensethatisnotcoveredbyinsurance. @   Theguidelinesuseoftheword shallleavesatrialcourtnodiscretioninaddingextraordinary b educationalexpensestotheobligorscomputed_percentage._Ԁ_See,_Ԁe.g.,Louisville&NashvilleR.Co. K v.Hammer,236S.W.2d971,973(Tenn.1951)#DCCD#DCCDԀ(holdinguseof shallinstatuterequiresmandatory 4 compliance).Weconcludethat:1)theguidelinescontemplateprivateschooltuitiontobean   extraordinaryeducationalexpensebecausethetuitionexceedsordepartsfromthecostofpublic  schooling;and_that2)_Ԁ___the_Ԁamountoftheexpensemustbeaddedtotheobligorspercentageofchild  supportcomputedundertheguidelines.    Applicationoftheguidelinestothiscasewouldthereforeresultinthefullamountofprivate Z schooltuitionbeingaddedtoDr.Barnettschildsupportpercentage.Moreover,Ms.Barnettsuggests C thatDr.BarnettagreedtoJoshuasattendanceatMcCalliebysigninga preliminaryapplicationfor ,| JoshuatoattendMcCalliewhenJoshuawasinthefourthgrade.Atthetimeofthetrialcourts e decision,however,itisclearfromtherecordthatDr.Barnettdidnotapproveoftheenrollmentand N statedthathewouldnotassistwiththetuition.Thetrialcourtdidnotmakeanexplicitfindingthatthe  7 partieshadagreedtosendJoshuatoMcCallie,nordoestherecordrevealsuchanagreement.Cf. !   Brooksv.Brooks,992S.W.2d403,408(Tenn.1999)(holdingthatthetrialcourthadimplicitlyfound " ! thatMr.Brookshadagreedtoassumeresponsibilityfortheprivateschoolexpenses). #"   Althoughadditionoftheprivateschoolexpensesis_mandated,_Ԁ_the_Ԁguidelinesdopermit t% $ deviations.Theguidelinesprovidethatthereisa rebuttablepresumptioninallchildsupportcasesthat ]&!% theamountofchildsupportdeterminedbyanapplicationoftheseguidelinesisthecorrectamountto F'"& beawardedunless...theapplicationoftheguidelineswouldbeunjustorinappropriateinaparticular  _case._ԀTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.01(2).TennesseeCodeAnn.36-5-101(e)(1)also  providesthatthecourtawardingsupportmaydeviatefromtheguidelines inordertoprovideforthe  bestinterestofthechild(ren)ortheequitybetweentheparties. k   InJonesv.Jones,930S.W.2d541(Tenn.1996),thisCourtaddressedinstancesinwhich =  downwarddeviation_to_Ԁachieveequitywouldbeappropriate.Wenotedthattheguidelinesexpressly & v statethreeinstancesinwhichdownwarddeviationmightbenecessarytoprovidefor_equity_Ԁbetween  _ theparties:  H 8  8`   (1)whereDHShastakencustodyofthechild(ren)pursuanttoa    neglect,dependency,orabuseaction;(2)wherethechild(ren)spend   morevisitationtimewiththeobligorthanisassumedbytheguidelines;   and(3)incasesinwhichtheobligorissubjectedtoan extreme   economichardship,suchaswhereotherchildrenlivingwiththe n  obligorhaveextraordinary_needs._______W ` x` x ___Id._Ԁ_____at_Ԁ545.Wefoundthatthislist,whilenotexhaustive,isa powerfulindicationofthetypesof )y situationswheredownwarddeviationisappropriate.Id. b   InJones,however,thetrialcourtattempted_to_Ԁachieveequitybyconsideringthefathers 4 misdeeds.Weheldthatdownwarddeviationtoachieveequitycouldnotbebaseduponthefactthat  thefather maynothavebeenperfectlyforthrightconcerninghisfinancesandchildcareexpenses,and  [that]hisspendinghabits[werenot]amodelofrestraint.Id.Wealsoemphasizethattheissuein  Jonesinvolvedtheproprietyofadownwarddeviationfromthebasechildsupportpercentage,andnot  fromamountsmandatorilyawardedforextraordinaryexpenses.Seeid.at542,545. q   Forpurposesofdeterminingthebasechildsupport_percentageor_Ԁadeviation_therefrom,_Ԁthe C guidelinesstatethattheobligeesincomeshouldnotbeconsidered.SeeTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch. ,| 1240!2!4!.03(2)._It_Ԁisassumedundertheguidelinesthattheobligeewillbeexpendingatleastan e equalpercentageofnet_incomefor_Ԁthesupportofthechildrenastheobligorisexpending.SeeTenn. N Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.03(2)._The_Ԁrationaleforgivingtrialcourtslessdiscretionin  7 ___deviating_Ԁ_downwardlyfrom_Ԁbaselinechild_support_Ԁhaslittleapplicationtodownwarddeviationfrom !   amandatoryimpositionofextraordinaryeducationalexpenses.Theequitytobedoneincases " ! involvingextraordinaryeducational_expenses_Ԁismorecloselylinkedtotheguidelinesassumption_that_ #" thechildsupportawardreflectstherespectivefinancialabilitiesofbothparents.See_Tenn._ԀComp.R. $# &Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.03(assumingthatthecustodialparentwillbeexpendingatleastanequal t% $ percentageofnetincomeastheobligorparent). ]&!%   Thisassumptiondoesnotapplyandwouldnecessarilyfailifextraordinaryexpenseswereto /(#' be___tacked_Ԁon_arbitrarilyunder_ԀTenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.04(c).Aparentwhoispaying )h$( increasedsupportintheformofprivateschooltuitionispayingsumsinadditiontothoseofthe *Q%) custodialparent.Whiletheparentrequiredtopaychildsupportmaybetheperson_better_Ԁabletobear *:&* theexpense,thisassumptionwillnotbetrueineverycase. +#'+ Ї  Someobligorparentsmayhavesubstantiallylessincomethanthecustodialparent.The  wholesaleimpositionofprivateschooltuitionontheobligorinthesecasescouldresultinatremendous  disparityintheobligorsrelativepercentageofincomecontributedaschildsupport!eventotheextent  ofabsorbingeverypennyoftheobligorsincome.Strictapplicationoftheguidelinesinthiscontext k couldimpoverishoneparent.Weareboundtorefrainfromaninterpretationoftheguidelinesthat T wouldleadto___an_Ԁabsurdresult.SeeBusinessBrokerageCtr.v.Dixon,874S.W.2d1,5(Tenn.1994) =  (holding_that when_Ԁthe[statutory]languageproducesanabsurdorincongruousresultwhenapplied & v inspecificfactualsituations,theintentoftheLegislaturewillprevailovertheliterallanguageofthe  _ _statute).___  H   Weconcludethatitisappropriatetoconsidertheincomeofthecustodialparentinconsidering    whetheradownwarddeviation_ #  4      _Ԁfromthetotalchildsupportaward(percentageplusextraordinary   educationalexpense)wouldachieveequity.Considerationofbothparentsincomerecognizesthe   intentoftheguidelinestoensure_that,_Ԁwhenparentsliveseparately,theeconomicimpactonthe   childrenisminimizedand totheextentthateitherparentenjoysahigherstandardofliving,the n  child(ren)share(s)inthathigherstandard.Tenn.Comp.R.&Regs.ch.1240!2!4!.02(2)(e). W  Accordingly,iftheequivalenceordisparityinnetincomesofthepartieswouldmaketheallocationof @ alloftheextraordinaryexpensetotheobligor unjustorinappropriateinaparticularcase,the )y presumptionofcorrectnessoftheamountofsupportrequiredbytheapplicationoftheguidelinesmay b berebutted. K   Weholdthatwholesaleimpositionofprivateschooltuitiononanoncustodialparentmay,in  someinstances,constitutejustsuchan unjustorinappropriateapplicationoftheguidelinesthat  wouldwarrantdownwarddeviation.Downwarddeviationinthiscontextwouldspreadthecostof  tuitionequitablyamongtheparties.Ourholdingisconsistentwithourlongestablishedcommonlaw  rulerequiringaparenttoprovidesupport inamannercommensuratewithhismeansandstationin q life.Nash,846S.W.2dat_805_Ԁ_(quoting__Evans_Ԁv.Evans,125Tenn.113,119,140S.W.745,747 Z _(1911)(internalquotationsomitted))._ C   _Applying_Ԁtheseprinciplestothiscase,weholdthatitwouldnotbe unjustorinappropriate e torequiretheentireamountoftheprivateschooltuitiontobepaidbyDr.Barnett.Asstatedabove, N Dr.Barnettsincomewasdeterminedtobe$209,000peryear.Ms.Barnettearns$28,000peryearand  7 isdependentuponchildsupportandalimonytomeettheremainderofher_needsandthoseof__her_ !   _children.______The_Ԁpresumptionthatthepercentageamountofchildsupportplusextraordinaryeducational " ! expenseisthecorrectamountofchildsupporthasnotbeenrebutted._Ԁ__We_ԀthereforeaffirmtheCourt #" ofAppealsandremandthecasetothetrialcourtforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion. $# CostsoftheappealinthisCourtareassessedagainstAppellant,RobertMcAlister_Barnett.#1CD ##11*#DC1_ t% $  /(#'    `     h     ____________________________________     `     h     JANICEM.HOLDER,JUSTICEXiXCD