### IN THE COURT OF APP EALS OF TENNESS EE ATJAC KSON Febr uary 24, 201 0 S es sio n H eard

at M em phi s JOAN NE WELLS v. MARK WELL S

D irec t A p p ea l f

ro m th e C ircu it C o u rt fo r S h elb y C o u n ty N o. C T - 000028- 08 R obert L . C hi l ders , Judge

N o. W 2009- 01600- C O A - R 3- C V - F i l ed M arch 15, 2010

This is divorce ca se, endinga fifte en year marriag e. Appe llant-Husband a ppeals from th etrial court’s classification and division of marital proper ty

. Appellee -Wife appeals from the trial cour t’s decision to impute income to her. F inding no e rror , we a ffirm. Tenn. R . A pp. P. 3. A ppe al as of R i ght ; Judgm ent of

t he C i rcui t C ourt A f

f i rm ed J. S TEV EN S TAFF ORD , J

. , del i ver ed t he opi ni on of t he C our t , i n w hi ch D AV I D R. F ARMER , J. and H OL L Y M. K I RBY , J

. , j oi ned. S tu a rt B

. B r e a k sto n e a n d K a th yB a k e r T e n n iso n , M e m p h is, T e n n e ss e e , fo r th e a p p e llan t, M ark W el l s. Joseph M i chael C oo k, G erm antow n, T enn essee, for t he ap pell ee, Joann e W el l s. OP I NI ON A p p e l l a n t , M a r k W e l l s ( “ M r . W e l l s ” ) , a n d App e l l e e , J o a n n e W e l l s ( “ M r s . W e l l s ”) w er e mar r i ed on O ct ober15, 1994. T heys epar at ed i n 2007, w i t h one chi l d bei ng bor n of t he m arr i age. M r s . W el l s fi l ed fordi vor ce on J anuary4, 2008. M r . W el l s fi led an ans w eron A pr i l 18, 2008, deny i ng al l m at er i al al l egat i ons , butr eques t i ng t hatt he part i es be di vor ced.

At t h e t i me t h e c o mpl a i n twas f i l e d , t h e p a r t i e s o wne d a h o me i n A r l i ngt on , TN ( “M ar i t al R es i dence ”) , and a l otw i t h a tr ai l er hom e thatt heyr ent ed. Shor t l ybefor e fi l i ng f o rd i v o r c e , t h e p a r t i e s s o l d a h o me i n Co r d o v a , TN ( “ Co r d o v a Ho me ” )

. Th e Co r d o v a Ho me s ol d for$116, 814. 86; t hi s m oney w as pl ace d i n a j oi nt s avi ngs acc ount pr i or t o t he fi l i ng of th e c o m p lain t f

o r d iv o rc e . D u rin g th e p e n d e n c yo f th e se p a ra tio n a n d d iv o rc e , M r. W e lls w ith d rew ap p rox im atelytw en tytho u san d d o ll ars f rom this acc o u n t. U p o n learn ing o f M r.-2-

W el l s’ w i t hd raw al , M rs . W el l s w i t hd rew sixty -f i ve thousan d o f t he rem ai ning fu nd s, p lac in g th e m o n e yin a sa v in g s ac c o u n t in h e r na m e . M rs. W e lls th e n sp e n t ap p ro x im a tely el even thous and of the w i t hdr aw n m oney . A tt he t i m e of tr i al , M rs. W ell s’ acc ounthad a b a lan c e o f

$ 5 4 , 2 3 3 .6 7

. T h e jo in t ac c o u n t h a d a re m a in in g b a lan c e o f $ 1 6 5 .4 0 , as M r. W e lls had w i t hd raw n th e m a jo ri t yof w hat r em ai ned i n the j ointaccou nt aft er M rs . W el l s’ w i t hdr aw al

. I n J anuary2006, M r . W el l s ’ fathert r ans fe rred , t o M r . W el l s , a par cel of r eal es t at e l ocat ed i n A r kans as . T he s ubj ectdeed doe s notname M r s . W el l s as an ow ner , and in d ica tes th a t th e p ro p e rty w a s tran sf e rre d f o r th e c o n sid e ra tio n o f ten d o llars

. M r . W e lls t es t i fi ed thatno m oneyw as excha nged fort he prope r t y . H ow ever , appr oxi m at el y s i x m ont hs b e f o re th is tr a n s f

e r, M r. W e lls lo a n e d h is f a th e r $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 o f

m a ri ta l f u n d s . B o th p a rties f

iled a n a f f id a v it o f in c o m e a n d e x p e n se s. O n h e r a f f id a v it, M rs. W e lls c laim e d th a t sh e h a s n o in c o m e . M r. W e lls’ a f f id a v it l iste d h is in c o m e f ro m h is e m p lo y m e n t, al ong w i th r ent al i ncome fr om t he part i es ’ t r ai l erhom e. M r . W el l s l at erfi l ed another a f f id a v it o f in c o m e a n d e x p e n se s. T h e re in , h e a g a in listed h is in c o m e f ro m h is e m p lo y m e n t, a n d i n c o me f

r o m t h e r e n t s c o l l e c t e d f r o m t h e t r a i l e r h o me , b u t n o t e d t h a tt h e r e n t a l i n c o me w as us ed t o payexpens es , m ai nt enanc e, and t axes on bot h t he M ar i t al R es i dence and the r e n t a l p r o p e r t y. O n M ay7, 2008, M r s . W el l s fi l ed a mot i on p e n d e n te lite , re q u e stin g a lim o n y , ch ild s uppor tand att or neyfee s . Fol l ow i ng a hea r i ng befor e the D i vor ce R efe r ee, M r . W el l s w as or der ed t o pay$564 a mont h i n chi l d s uppor t , and $500 a mont h i n t empora r yal i m onyfr om J une t hr ough Sept ember 2008. M r . W el l s w as al s o or der ed t o cont i nue pay i ng t he mort gage on t he M ar i t al R es i dence , and the hea l t h i ns ur ance pr emi um s forbot h M rs. W ell s and the chil d. In add i t i on , M r. W el l s w as al so ordered t o pay $5 00 i n at t orney fees t o M rs . W el l s’ at t or ney . T he t r i al cour tent er ed an or der r efl ect i ng t he D i vor ce Refer ee’ s fi ndi ngs on J une 23, 2008. O n J anuary22, 2009, M r s . W el l s fi l ed a mot i on t o m odi fyt he p e n d e n te lit e s uppor t

. A hear i ng on M r s . W el l s ’ m ot i on w as hel d on February24, 2009, and the D i vor ce R e f e re e f o u n d th a t th e re w a s a sig n if ica n t v a ria n c e to ju stif

ym o d if ica tio n o f

c h ild su p p o rt. T h e D iv o rc e R e f

e re e f o u n d th a t M r. W e lls h a d a g ro ss in c o m e o f $ 6 ,1 9 2 a m o n th f ro m h is empl oy m ent , and w as al s o r ece i vi ng $500 a mont h r enton t he p arti es ’ t r ai l erhom e. H ow ever , t he D i vor ce Referee d id n oti m put e i ncome t o M r s . W el l s , fi ndi ng t hats he had zer o i ncome. U s i ng t hes e i ncomes, t he D i vor ce R efe r ee i ncr eas ed chi l d s uppor tt o $944 a m o n t h

. T h e D i v o r c e R e f e r e e a l s o f

o u n d t h a tM r . W e l l s s h o u l d p a y $ 5 0 0 a m o n t h i n a l i m o n y, al ong w i t h M r s . W el l s ’ at t or neyfee s for t he hear i ngs on m odi fi cat i on. O n February27, 2009, th e tr ia l c o u rt e n te re d a n o rd e r c o n f ir m in g th e D iv o rc e R e f e re e ’s ru lin g . M r s . W el l s fi l ed a Pet i t i on forW r i tof Scir e Facias o n F ebruary23, 2009. I n her pet i t i on, M r s . W el l s al l eged thatM r . W el l s had t aken out a $15, 000 l oan fr om hi s 401K pl an i n vi ol at i on of t he t empora r yi nj unct i o n . M r s . W el l s al s o al l eged that , i n vi ol at i on of t he-3-

t empora r yi nj unct i on, M r . W el l s s pentbetw een $100, 000 and $150, 000 on fourw heel er s and r ace s fort he part i es ’ d au g h ter. M r . W el l s fi l ed an a ns w eron M ar ch 2, 2009, w her ei n he deni ed thathe had w r i t t en noti ce o f t he t empora r yi nj unct i on. M r . W el l s admi t t ed thathe t ook a $15, 000 l oan fr om hi s 4 0 1K , buts t at ed thathe di d notw i l l ful l yi nt end t o vi ol at e a c o u rt o rd e r. H e f

u rth e r d e n ied w ill f

u l v io latio n o f th e c o u rt o rd e r reg a rd in g m o n e y f o r h is d a u g h te r’ s f

o u r w h e e le r r a c in g a c tiv itie s . A tt he t i m e o f tr ial , M r s . W el l s w as for t y - fi ve y ear s ol d, and had c om pl et ed hi gh s chool and a cour s e i n m edi cal codi ng. H er l as t empl oy m ent w as in 2 0 0 4 , as an admi ni s t r at i ve as s i s t ant

. A t t he t i m e of t he hear i ng, M r . W el l s had compl et ed hi gh s chool a s w e ll a s so m e c o m m u n ity c o lleg e a n d tec h n ica l train in g c o u rse s. H e a lso h e ld a lice n se to per for m heat i ng and ai rcondi t i oni ng w or k. A tt he t i m e of tr i al , M r . W el l s w as w or ki ng as a m a c h in is t a n d o p e ra tin g h is o w n b u s in e s s f ro m th e M a ri ta l R e s id e n c e . F o ll o w ing a be n ch tr ial , the t ri al co u rt d ec lared the pa rt ies d ivo rce d

. T h e tri al co u rt found t hatM r . W el l s had an i ncome of $6, 100 a mont h and i m put ed an i ncome of $27, 000 a y e a r t o M rs. W e lls. T h e trial co u rt f o u n d th a t, w h ile b o th p a rties a re e m p lo y a b le, M r. W e lls has a great er earning cap aci t y t han M rs . W el l s. T he t ri al cou rt speci fi cal l y no t ed thatM rs . W el l s coul d have done m or e t o fi nd a j ob, but t hat t her e w as “s i gni fi cantdi s par i t y ” i n earni ng capa ci t y . Acc o r d i n g l y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t a war d e d M r s . W e l l s t r a n s i t i o n a l a l i mon y o f $ 5 00 a m ont h forfoury ear s . U s i ng t he s ame i ncome f i gur es , t he t r i al cour t s et chi l d s uppor t at$596 a m o n th a n d e n te re d a p e rm a n e n t p a re n tin g p la n . T h e trial c o u rt th e n c las sif ied a n d d iv id e d th e p ro p e rty . T h e trial c o u rt o rd e re d b o th th e M a rital R e sid e n c e , an d th e tra iler h o m e , to b e so ld a n d th e p ro c e e d s to b e sp lite q u a lly betw een the part i es . M r . W el l s w as or der ed t o pay M r s . W el l s one- hal f of the r ent al pr ocee ds fr om t he tr ai l erunt i l i tw as s ol d, al t hough t he par t i es w er e t o be equal l y r es pons i bl e fort he m ai nt ena n ce an d t axes on t he pr oper t y . T he tr i al cour tal l ow ed M r . W el l s t o l i ve i n t he M ar i t al R es i dence unt i l i tw as s ol d, butthe t r i al cour thel d t hatM r . W el l s w oul d be r es pons i bl e fort he mort gage pay m en ts, ut i l i t i es , t axes , i ns ur ance and mai nt enanc e on t he M a rital R e sid e n c e u n til it i s s o ld

. T h e trial co u rt o rd e re d M rs. W e lls to re im b u rse M r. W e lls f o r o n e -h a lf

o f th e re p a ir s n e c e s s a ry to s e ll th e M a ri ta l R e s id e n c e . T h e tri al co u rt ad d resse d the A rka n sas pro p erty tr an sfe rred to M r. W ell s b yh is fathe r. T he cour tval ued the pr oper t yat$28, 825, and cl as s i fi ed i t as m ar i t al pr oper t y ; t hi s deci s i on w as bas ed upon the court ’ s det er m i nat i on t hatt he tr ans fe r o f t he pr oper t yhad bee n pr eci pi t at ed byt he $10, 000 m ar i t al funds l oan t hat M r . W el l s had m ade t o hi s father , and the l ack o f proo f t hat this l oan had been repai d. C on sequen t l y , th e t ri al cou rtfou nd t hat M rs . W el l s had an i nt er es t i n one- hal f of t he am ount of t he l oan. T o acc ountfort hi s m oney , t he t r i al cour taw ar ded M r s . W el l s t he funds s he hel d i n hers avi ngs ac co u n t in e xces s of her-4-

s har e of mar i t al funds fr om t he s al e of t he C or dova H om e. T he t r i al cour t hel d t hatt hi s w as a p p ro x im a te ly $ 4 ,1 0 0

. T he tr i al cour tfound t hat eac h par t yw as ent i t l ed t o one- hal f of the pr ocee ds fr om t he s al e of t h e C o rdo v a home, or$58, 407. 43. T he tr i al cour tfound t hat$54, 233. 67 of t he pr ocee ds w er e hel d byM r s . W el l s i n a s avi ngs acc ount, w hi ch the tr i al cour tcl as s i fi ed as m ar i t al pr oper t y . M r . W el l s had w i t hdr aw n and s pent t he maj or i t yof t he r emai ni ng pr ocee ds fro m the jo int sav ing s ac co u n t, into w h ich th e m o n eyw as o ri g inallyp lace d

. T h e tri al co u rt a w a rd e d M rs. W e lls a ll o f th e re m a in in g $ 5 4 ,2 3 3 .6 7 . S p e c if ica lly , the c o u rt h e ld th a t, w h ile M r s . W el l s h a d s p e n ta p p r o x i ma t e l y$ 1 1 , 0 0 0 o f t h e f u n d s , t h e e x c e s s i n t h e a ccount r epr es ent ed hers har e of t he A r kans as pr oper t y , as di s cus s ed above. T he t r i al cour thel d t hat $165. 40 r emai ned i n t he j oi nt acc ount , i nt o w hi ch the pr ocee ds w er e or i gi nal l ypl ace d, and a w a rd e d th is a c c o u n t to M r. W e lls

. T h e tri al co u rta d d re ssed the p arti es’ rem ainin g b an k ac co u n ts. T h e tri al co u rt cl as s i fi ed tw o chec ki ng acc ount s hel d byM r . W el l s , w i t h r es pect i ve bal ance s of $246. 87 and $633. 29, as m ar i t al p rop erty , and aw ar ded thes e ac count s ent i r el yt o M r . W el l s . T he tr i al cour tcl as s i fi ed t w o s avi ngs acc ount s hel d i n M r . W el l s ’ name, w i t h bal ance s of $65. 08 and $ 2 2 4 .0 0 , a s m a ri ta l p ro p e rt y , a n d a ls o a w a rd e d th e s e a m o u n ts to M r. W e lls

. T h e t r i a l c o u r th e l d t h a tM r . W e l l s ’ 4 0 1 k w a s m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y, a n d d i v i d e d i te q u a l l y. H e v alue d the 4 0 1 k at $3 1 , 5 5 6

. 9 9 , d ivide d itin h alf, an d d ed u cted $ 1 2 , 8 2 4 .4 8 fro m M r. W el l s ’ s har e, r epr es ent i ng t he bal ance r emai ni ng on t he l oan M r . W el l s too k o u t f r om t he 4 0 1 k d u rin g th e p e n d e n c yo f th e d iv o rc e . T h e trial co u rt f o u n d th a t M rs. W e lls h a d se p a ra te p ro p e rtyo f

$ 9 8 7 .6 3 in a n IR A sh e o b tain e d w h ile w o rk in g p rio r to th e m a rria g e . M rs. W e lls w as aw ar ded t he IRA i n i t s ent i r ety . T he t r i al cour t cr edi t ed M r s . W el l s w i t h a $2, 000 l oan s he made t o hers i s t er . T he t r i al cour t al s o cr edi t ed M r . W el l s w i t h $3, 500 i n gi ft s he made t o ot herpeopl e. T he t r i al cour t al s o di vi ded t he per s onal pr oper t y . H e al l ocat ed m uch of the fou r w heeler equ i pm ent pu rchased si nce t he separ at i on t o M r. W el l s. T he tri al co u rt a lso cr edi t ed M r . W el l s w i t h $11, 000 i n r ent s he had r ece i ved on t he part i es ’ t r ai l erhom e s i nce t h e t i me o f

s e p a r a t i o n . T h e t r i a l c o u r t o r d e r e d t h a t e a c h p a r t yb e r e s p o n s i b l e f o rt h e i ro wn c re d it c a rd d e b t. A s a r es ul tof t hi s cl as s i fi cat i on, t he tr i al court f o u n d that t her e w as a t ot al of $ 2 3 6 , 9 8 6

. 0 1 i n m a r i t a l a s s e t s . O f t h i s a m o u n t , M r . W e l l s w a s a w a r d e d $ 9 5 , 6 9 8

. 3 4 , o rf o r t yfour per cent of t he mar i t al es t at e. M r s . W el l s w as aw ar ded $122, 091. 81, orfi ft y - s i x per cent of t he mar i t al es t at e. O n M ar ch 18, 2009, a Fi nal D ecr ee w as ent er ed r efl ect i ng t he di vi s i on. O n A p ri l 17 , 2 0 0 9 , M r. W ell s filed a M o ti o n to A lt er o r A m en d the F inal D ec ree . M r. W el l s as s er t ed t h at th e tr ial cour terr ed i n cal cul at i ng M r s . W el l s ’ por t i on of t he mar i t al-5-

es t at e. Speci fi cal l y , M r . W el l s as s er t ed that , i n or dert o m ai nt ai n t he per cent ages atw hi ch th e trial c o u rt h a d d iv id e d th e e sta te, he w a s en tit led to a n a d d iti o n a l $ 2 ,5 0 0

. A lso , M r. W e lls a s s e r t e d t h a tt h e t r i a l c o u r te r r e d i n c l a s s i f yi n g t h e A r k a n s a s p r o p e r t y a s m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y; sp e c if ica lly , M r. W e lls a ss e rte d th a t trial co u rt sh o u ld h a v e f o u n d th a t th e p ro p e rtyw a s h is s epar at e pr oper tyor , i n t he al t ernat i ve, t hatt he court s houl d have cl as s i fi ed onl y$10, 000 of th e p ro p e rt ya s m a ri ta l. O n Ju ly2 , 2 0 0 9 , th e tr ial c o u rt e n ter e d a n o rd e rin g d e n y in g M r. W e lls’ M o tio n to A l t erorA m end. I n t hi s or der , t he tr i al cour tcorrec ted it s ca l cul at i on err ors o t hatt he di vi s i on w oul d acc ur at el yr efl ectt hatM r s . W el l s w as aw ar ded $126, 275. 57 of t he mar i t al es t at e. T hi s corr ect i on r es ul t ed i n 43. 1% of t he m ar i t al es t at e goi ng t o M r . W el l s , and 56. 9% of t he es t at e goi ng t o M r s . W el l s . I n t hi s or der , t he t r i al cour temphasi zed i t s fi ndi ng t hatt he evi dence pr es ent ed s how ed that M r . W el l s m ade a $10, 000 l oan t o hi s father , t hatt hes e funds wer e n o t r e p a i d i n k i n d , b u t r a t h e r wer e r e p a i d whe n M r . W e l l s ’ c o n v e y e d t h e A r kans as p ro p e rt yto M r. W e lls , th e re b ym a k in g th e A rk a n s a s p ro p e rt ym a ri ta l. M r. W e lls tim e lya p p e a led a n d ra ise s the f o llo w in g iss u e s fo r ou r rev iew , as w e re sta te t h e m: 1

. W h e t h e rt h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d i n c l a s s i f yi n g t h e A r k a n s a s p r o p e r t y a s m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y? 2. W het hert he tr i al cour ter r ed i n cl as s i fy i n g the re nt al i ncome and gi ft s m ade dur i ng t he p art i es’ separat i on as m ari t al and al l ocati ng t hem t o the M r. W el l s? 3. W het hert he tr i al cour t ’ s di vi s i on of pr oper t ydi s t r i but i ng fi ft y - s even pe rce n t o f t he m ar i t al es t at e t o M r s . W el l s i s equi t abl e? M r s . We l l s a l s o r a i s e s a n i s s u e f o ro u rr e v i e w: 1

. W h ethe r t h e tri al co u rterred in im p u ti n g M rs. W ell s’ i n co m e a t $2 7 , 0 0 0 a y ea r? W e m u st f

irst p o in t o u t th a t n e ith e r M r. W e lls n o r M rs. W e lls p ro v id e d th is C o u rt w ith a t able as requi red byR ule 7 of the R ules of the C ou rtof A pp eal s. R ule 7 st at es:

( a) I n anydom es t i c r el at i ons appea l i n w hi ch ei t herpar t yt akes i s s ue w i t h t he cl as s i fi cat i on of pr operty ordebtorw i t h t he m anneri n w hi ch t he tr i al cour tdi vi ded oral l ocat ed the mar i t al p ro p e rtyo r d e b t, th e b rie f o f th e p a rtyra isi n g th e iss u e sh a ll cont ai n, i n t he st at ement of fact s ori n an appe ndi x, a t abl e i n a f o r m su b sta n tiallysim ilar to th e f o rm a ttac h e d h e re to . T h is-6- t abl e s hal l l i s tal l pr oper t yand debt s cons i der ed byt he tr i al cour t , i ncl udi ng: ( 1) al l s epar at e pr oper t y , ( 2) al l m ar i t al p ro p e rt y , a n d (3 ) a ll s e p a ra te a n d m a ri ta l d e b ts

. ( b) E ach e nt r yi n t he t abl e m ust i nclude a ci t ati on t o the record w her e ea ch part y ’ s evi dence r egar di ng t he cl as s i fi cat i on or val uat i on of t he prope r t y or debtcan be found and a c ita tio n to the rec o rdw her e the tr i alcour t ’s decis i on r egar di ng t he c las sif ica tio n , v a lu a tio n , d iv isio n , o r a llo c a tio n o f th e p ro p e rty o r d e b t c a n b e f

o u n d

. (c) If c o u n sel d isag ree s w ith an yen tryin the o p p o sing co u n sel’s tab le, c o u n se l m u st in c lu d e in h is o r h e r b rie f

.. .a s im ilar ta b le c o n ta in in g c o u n s e l’ s v e rs io n o f th e f a c ts

. (E m p h a sis a d d e d ). T h is C o u rt h a s p re v io u sly h e ld th a t, “ ‘w h e re a n a p p e llan t f a ils to c o m p ly w ith this rule, that ap p ell an t w aive s all su ch issue s relati n g to the rule’s req u ir em en ts. ’” Slaughterv. Slaughter , N o. W 2007- 01488- C O A

- R 3- C V , 2008 W L 1970491, at*2 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 2008) ( quot i ng St ock v. St ock , N o. W 2005- 02634- C O A

- R 3- C V , 206 W L 3804420, a t* 5 , n . 3 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 2006) ( quot i ng H o w e ll v. H

o w e ll , No. W 2 0 0 1

- 0 1 1 6 7

- CO A- R3

- CV , 2002 W L 1905307, at *4 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 2002) ( ci t i ng B ean v. B ean , 40 S. W

. 3d 52 ( T enn. C t. A p p . 2 0 0 0 )). “ T h is C o u rt is u n d e r n o d u tyto se a rc h a trial c o u rt re c o rd in o rd e r to di s cern t he val uat i on of t he coupl e’ s pr oper t y . ” Slaughter , 2008 W L 1970491 at*2 ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed)

. H ow ever , for good caus e, t hi s C our t m ay s us pend t he r equi r ement s of t hes e rul es i n a part i cul arcas e. T enn. R

. A pp. C t

. R ul e 7. T he i nt ent of t he R ul es i s foral l cas es t o be deci ded on the mer i t s i f pos s i bl e. W i t h t hi s i n m i nd w e have conduct ed a t edi ous and m et i cul ous r evi ew of t he part i es ’ br i efs and the r ecor d and have been abl e t o det er m i ne t he evi dence pr es ent ed att r i al and t he fi ndi ngs by t he t r i al cour t

. C ons equent l y , w e w i l l pr ocee d w ith o u r re v iew d e sp ite th e p a rties ’ fa ilu re to c o m p ly w ith th e ru les o f th is C o u rt. W h ile in th is c a se w e c h o se to p ro c e e d w ith o u r re v iew d e sp ite th e f a c t th a t th e p a rties c h o se n o t to a b id e b yth e ru les o f

th is C o u rt, w e c a n n o t sa yw e w ill b e so a c c o m m o d a tin g a n d c h o o se to d o th e s a m e in th e f

u tu re . C l as s i f i cat i on M r . W e l l s c o n t e n d s t h a tt h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d w h e n i t c l a s s i f i e d t h e A r k a n s a s p r o p e r t y, th e re n tal in c o m e f

ro m th e p a rties ’ tra iler h o m e , an d g if ts m a d e to th ird p a rties b yM r. W e lls as m ar i t al as s et s . T he di vi s i on of m ar i t al pr oper t y , i ncl udi ng i t s cl as s i fi cat i on and val uat i on a re f in d in g s o f

f a c t. W oo dw ord v. W

oo dw ord , 2 4 0 S W 3 d 8 2 5 , 8 2 8 (T en n . C t. A p p . 2 0 0 7 ). A ccor di ngl y , t he tr i al cour t ’ s deci s i ons r egar di ng cl as s i fi cat i on, val uat i on and di vi s i on of-7-

pr oper t yar e r evi ew ed de novo w i t h a pr es um pt i on of corr ectnes s unl es s t he evi dence p re p o n d e ra te s o th e rw is e . Far r ar v. Far r ar , 553 S. W

. 2d 741, 743 ( T enn. 1977)

. “I f t he tr i al co u rt ’s fa ctua l determ ination s are b ase d o n it s ass essm en t of w itn ess c red ibil ity , this C o u rt w ill n o t r e e v a lu a te th a t a s s e s s m e n t a b s e n t c le a r a n d c o n v in c in g e v i d e n c e to th e c o n tr a ry.” Heffing ton v. H

effing to n , N o . M 2 0 0 9 -0 0 4 3 4 -C O A -R 3 -C V , 2 0 1 0 W L 6 2 3 6 2 9 (T e n n . C t. A pp. Feb. 19, 2010) ( ci t i ng J o n e s v . G a rr e tt , 9 2 S .W .3 d 8 3 5 , 8 3 8 (T e n n . 2 0 0 2 ). W h e n m a k i n g i t s d i v i s i o n o f p r o p e r t y, t h e t r i a l c o u r t m u s t f i r s t c l a s s i f

y t h e p r o p e r t y. T enne ssee r ecogni zes t w o di s t i nctt ypes orcl as s es of pr oper t y : “mar i t al pr oper t y ” and “s epar at e pr oper t y . ” T h e d i s t i nct i on i s i m por t antbeca us e Tenn. C ode A nn § 36- 4- 121( a) “pr ovi des onl y for t he di vi s i on of m ar i t al pr oper t y . ” B at s on v. B at

s on , 769 S. W

. 2d 849, 856 (Ten n. C t

. A pp . 19 88 ). M ari t al propert yi s defi ned as:

al l r eal and per s onal pr opert y , bot h t angi bl e and i nt angi bl e, acqui r ed byei t herorbot h s pous es dur i ng t he cour s e of the m ar r i age up t o t he dat e of t he fi nal di vor ce he ar i ng and ow ned by e i t h e r o r b o t h s p o u s e s a s o f t h e d a t e o f t h e f i l i n g of a c o m p la in t f

o r d iv o rc e ... T enn . C od e A nn . § 3 6-4-121 (b) (1) (2002 ). S eparat e prope rtyi s defi ned as :

all rea l and p erso n al pro p ertyo w n ed b ya sp o u se b ef o re m ar r i age. . . ; pr oper t y acqui r ed i n excha nge for pr oper t yacqui r ed b e f o re m a rria g e ; in c o m e f ro m a n a p p re c iatio n o f p ro p e rty ow ned by a spous e befor e m arr i age e xceptw hen cha r act er i zed a s ma r i t a l p r o p e r t y . . . ; p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d b ya s p o u s e a ta n yt i me b y gift , beq uest , dev i se or descent ; pain and sufferi ng aw ards, vict i m of cri m e com pen sat i on aw ards, futur e m edical exp enses, and futur e l os tw ages ; and pr o p er t yacqui r ed bya s pous e af t er an o rde r o f l egal s epar at i on w her e the courthas m ade a fi nal d i s p o s i t i o n o f

p r o p e r t y. T e n n . C o d e A n n . § 3 6

- 4

- 1 2 1 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( 2 0 0 2 )

. W e w i l l a d d r e s s e a c h p i e c e o f p r o p e r t y s e p a r a t e l y.

A rka n sa s P ro

p e rty O n ap p ea l, M r. W ell s su b m it s that the A rka n sas pro p erty w as a gift fro m h is fathe r; t her efor e, under T enn. C ode. A nn. § 36- 4- 121( b) ( 2) ( D ) , M r . W el l s cont ends t hatt he Ar k a n s a s p r o p e r t ys h o u l d b e c l a s s i f i e d a s h i s s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y n o ts u b j e c tt o d i v i s i o n . As-8-

di s cus s ed above , t he t r i al cour t hel d t hat t he A r kans as pr oper t yw as m ar i t al pr oper t ybas ed on t he fa ct t hat M r . W el l s had l oaned hi s fathert en thous and dol l ar s of m ar i t al funds , w i t hout pr ovi di ng s uffi ci entpr oof t hatt hi s m oneyw as pai d back. O n M r . W el l s ’ m ot i on t o al t eror amend, t he t r i al cour tr ei t er at ed thi s fi ndi ng byexpl i ci t l ys t at i ng:

T h e C o u rt f

u rth e r w a n ts t o e m p h a siz e th a t ith a s m a d e a sp e c if ic fi ndi ng fr om t he evi dence pr es ent ed that[M r . W el ls] us ed ap p r o x im ately$ 1 0 , 0 0 0

. 0 0 in m arit al fu n d s to p ayfo r his fa ther’s di vor ce w hi ch w as notr epai d an d t hati n r etur n hi s father c o n v e y e d t h e Ar k a n s a s r e a l e s t a t e t o [ M r . W e l l s ] wh i c h b e c a me m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y. B as ed upon t hi s cl as s i fi cat i on, t he tr i al cour tcredi t ed M r . W el l s w i t h a mar i t al as s etof $28, 825. I n or dert o s ecur e M r s . W el l s ’ i nt er es ti n t hes e l oaned f unds , t he courtcr edi t ed her w i t h the savi ng s accou nt, w hich accou nt cont ai ned t he m on eyshe w i t hd rew from t he p art i es’ jo in t s a v in g s a c c o u n t h o ld in g th e f u n d s f ro m th e s a le o f

th e C o rd o v a h o m e . Pr oper t yobt ai ned dur i ng m arr i age i s pr es um ed t o be m ar i t al pr oper t y . T enn. C ode. A n n . § 3 6 -4 -1 2 1 (b )(1 )(A ); s ee al s o D unlap v. D unlap , 996 S. W

. 2d 803, 814 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 1998)

. A par t ym ayr ebutt hi s pr es um pt i on by sh o w ing t hatt he pr oper t yw as a gi ftt o t hat p a rt ya lo n e . I

d . T h e b u rd e n o f

p ro v in g th a t th e p ro p e rtyw a s a g if t an d , the re f

o re , se p a ra te p ro p e rt yf

a lls u p o n th e s p o u s e a s s e rt in g th a t th e p ro p e rt yis a g if t. I d . A f ter re v iew in g th e re c o rd , th is C o u rt f in d s th a t th e e v id e n c e d o e s n o t p re p o n d e ra te a g a in st th e trial c o u rt’s f in d in g th a t th e A rk a n sa s p ro p e rtyw a s n o t a g if t m a d e to M r. W e lls al one; r ather , t he pr oof s uppor t s t he court ’s fi ndi ng t hatt hi s pr oper t yw as t r ans ferr ed as r epaym entfort he l oan made w i t h m ar i t al funds. A tt r i al , t he part i es pr es ent ed al m os tno evi dence out s i de t hei r compet i ng t es t i m oni es conce r ni ng t he l oan made t o M r . W el l s ’ father and the A r kans as pr oper t y . I n det er m i ni ng t hat t he A r kans as pr oper t y w as not a gi ft , t he t r i al cou rti m pli ci t l ym ade a c redi bil i t yfin d in g b ycho osi ng t o d i sr egard M r. W el l s’ u n s u b s ta n tia te d te s tim o n y th a t h is f a th e r h a d re p a id th e lo a n a n d th e p ro p e rt y w a s a g if t. W e defe rt o t he tr i al cour t ’ s fi ndi ngs on cr edi bi l i t y abs ent cl earand convi nci ng evi dence t o t he co n tr ary . He

ff in g to n v . He

ff in g to n , N o. M 2009- 00434- C O A

- R 3- C V , 2010 W L 623629 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. Feb. 19, 2010) ( ci t i ng J o n e s v . G a rr e tt , 9 2 S

. W

. 3 d 8 3 5 , 8 3 8 (T en n . 2 0 0 2 ). T he r ecor d s how s t hatM r . W el l s obt ai ned the A r kans as pr o p e rtyi n J anuary2006 fr om h is fathe r. O n cro ss ex am ination , M r. W ell s ad m itted g iving h is fathe r t en tho u san d d o ll ars o f m a rital f

u n d s in 2 0 0 5 to p a yf

o r th e f a th e r’s d iv o rc e . H e sta ted th a t h is f a th e r h a d p a id hi m back, butt hathe coul d nots how w her e hi s fatherpai d hi m back. T he w arr an t ydeed t r ans ferr i ng t he pr oper t yw as admi t t ed i nt o evi dence

. T he dee d s t at es t hatt he A r kans as-9-

p ro p e rt yw a s tr a n s f

e rr e d f o r th e c o n s id e ra tio n o f te n d o lla rs . H ow ever , M r . W el l s t es t i fi ed t hathe di d notpayhi s fatheranyt h ing fort hi s pr oper t y . H e t es t i fi ed that , att he t i m e the p ro p e rty w as t ransfer red, a ho use w as al ready bu i l t on t he l and

. M rs . W el l s t est i fi ed th a t, sin c e o b tain in g th e p ro p e rty , m a rital f u n d s h a d b e e n u se d to p a yth e p ro p e rtytax e s o n th is pr oper t y . M r s . W el l s fur t hert es t i fi ed that , at the ti m e the pr oper t yw as acqui r ed, t he l and w as vaca nt , butt hat , s i nce t hat t i m e, a one bedr oom hous e and gar age had been bui l t on t he p ro p e rt y .

B as ed upon ourr evi ew of t he evi dence , w e find t hatM r . W el l s di d notr ebutt he pr es um pt i on t hatpr oper t yacqui r ed dur i ng m arr i age i s m ar i t al pr oper t y . T he evi dence does not pr eponder at e aga i ns tt he t r i al cour t ’ s fi ndi ng t hatt he A r kans as pr oper t yw as t r ans ferr ed as r epaym entfort he l oan, nori s t her e cl ear and convi nci ng evi dence contr adi ct i ng t he tr i al c o u rt’s f in d in g o n th e c re d ib ili tyo f M r. W e lls. C o n se q u e n tly , w e f in d th a t th e trial c o u rt d id n o t e rr in f

in d in g th a t th e A rk a n s a s p ro p e rt yw a s m a ri ta l p ro p e rt y .

M r. W e lls c o n ten d s th a t ev e n if th is C o u rt d e ter m in e s th a t th e A rk a n s a s p ro p e rtyis m ar i t al , w e s houl d fi nd t hatonl yt en thous and dol l ar s of t he pr oper t y( w h ich am ount r e p r e s e n t s t h e a m o u n t o f t h e l o a n m a d e t o h i s f a t h e r ) s h o u l d b e c l a s s i f

i e d a s m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y. W e f in d th is c o n ten tio n to b e w ith o u t m e rit. F irst, w e re itera te o u r f in d in g th a t M r. W e lls d id notpr ove thatt he A r kans as pr oper t yw as a gi ft

. B eca us e he di d not pr ove t hatt he A r kans as pr oper t yw as a gi ft , he di d notr ebutt he pr es um pt i on t hat t he A r kans as pr oper t yw as m ar i t al pr oper t yw hen i tw as obt ai ned. A ccor di ngl y , t he enti re val ue at t he t i m e of a cqui s i t i on and anyi ncr eas e i n val ue o f the pr oper t ybecomes m ar i t al pr oper t y . T enn. C ode A nn. § 36- 4- 1 2 1 (b )(1 )(B ) ( 2 0 0 2 )

. M r . W e lls d id n o t p ro v e th a t any p a rt o f th is p ro p e rtyw a s a g if t. Fur t her , w e not e t hatno evi dence w as pr es ent ed at t r i al as t o t he val ue of t he pr oper t y att he t i m e of t r ans fer

. M or eover , t he m anner i n w hi ch t he t r i al cour t gave M r s . W el l s ’ cr edi tfor h e r sh a re o f

th e A rk a n sa s p ro p e rtyin e f f e c t trea ted o n ly$ 1 0 ,0 0 0 o f th e p ro p e rty a s m a rital. T he A rkansas propert yw as val ued at$2 8, 82 5. H ow ever, t he tr i al cou rt on l yaw arded M rs . W ell s ap p rox im ately$ 4 , 1 0 0 as h er sh are o f th is pro p erty , b ase d u p o n the c o u rt ’s det er m i nat i on t hathers har e w oul d co m e fro m the funds i n hers avi ngs acc ountt hat e x c e e d e d h e r s h a re o f

th e f u n d s f ro m th e s a le o f

th e C o rd o v a h o m e .

R ent

M r . W el l s nextcont ends t hatt he tr i al cour terr ed i n char gi ng M r . W el l s w i t h $11, 000 a s a m a rital as se t f

o r th e re n tal inc o m e h e re c e iv e d f ro m th e p a rties ’ tra iler h o m e d u rin g th e ir s epar at i on. M r . W el l s fi r s tar gues t hatt he r ent al i ncome col l ect ed fr om A pr i l 2007 t hr ough-10-

J anuary2008, di d notexi s tatt he t i m e of the fi l i ng of t he compl ai nt ; t her efor e, he ar gues t hat th e m o n e yc o llec ted w a s n o t a m a rital a ss e t su b jec t to d iv isio n . F u rth e r M r. W e lls su b m its t hatt he tr i al cour terr ed becaus e t he funds w er e used for paym ent on t he part i es ’ m or t gage o n th e M a ri ta l R e s id e n c e .

T he tr i al c o u rtfou nd t hat M r. W el l s had co l l ect ed $ 11 , 00 0 in r ent fr om t he p art i es’ t r a i l e r h o me d u r i n g t h e p a r t i e s ’ s e p a r a t i o n a n d d u r i n g t h e d i v o r c e p r o c e e d i n g s . Th e t r i al co u rtclassified this as a m arit al asse t and cre d it ed the en ti re am o u n t o f the $ 1 1 , 0 0 0 to M r. W e lls’s p o rtio n o f

m a rital a ss e ts. It is u n d isp u ted th a t th e tr a ile r h o m e is a m a rital a ss e t. A ccor di ngl y , anyi ncome r ece i ved fr om i tw oul d al s o be a mar i t al as s et

. T enn. C ode. A nn §36- 4- 121( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( 2002)

. It is undi s put ed thatM r . W el l s r ece i ved the r entdur i ng t he p a rt ie s ’ s e p a ra tio n a n d d iv o rc e .

Fi r s t , w e addr es s t he r entr ece i ved pr i ort o t he fi l i ng of t he compl ai nt

. I f t he r ent co ll ec te d s till e x isted at t h e ti m e o f th e f il ing o f th e c o m p lai n t, p u rsua n t t o the s tatu tory pr ovi s i ons , i tw oul d be a mar i t al as s ets ubj ectt o equi t abl e di vi s i on. T enn. C ode A nn. § 36- 4- 1 2 1 (b ) (2 0 0 2 ). B e c a u se th e trial c o u rt c las sif ied th e e n tire r e n tal in c o m e a s a m a rital a ss e t, w e musti nfert hatt he tr i al cour tfound t hatM r . W el l s s t i l l m ai nt ai ned the funds he col l ect ed as r enton t he par t i es ’ t r ai l er hom e at t he t i m e of fi l i ng t he compl ai nt , and thatt he moneyhad not been pai d t ow ar ds t he par t i es ’ m or t gage. M r . W el l s fai l ed t o pr es ent any evi dence , ot her t han hi s ow n t es t i m ony , as t o w hen the moneyw as s pentand/ orfor w hat purpos e the money w as us ed. H e admi t t ed r ece i vi ng al l of t he moneyand al s o admi t t ed nots har i ng anypor t i on o f th e m o n e y w ith M rs. W e lls. T h e trial c o u rt m a d e a n im p licit f in d in g a s to th e c re d ib ili ty of M r . W el l s on t hi s i s s ue and no c l earand convi nci n g ev iden ce t o r ebutt hi s fi ndi ng has been s ubm i t t ed. A ccor di ngl y , w e fi nd t hat t he t r i al cour t di d noterri n cl as s i fy i ng t he money c o llec ted a s re n t o n th e p a rties ’ tra iler h o m e d u rin g th e p a rties ’ se p a ra tio n a s a m a rital a ss e t.

N e x t w e a d d re ss th e re n t co llec ted a f ter th e f ili n g o f th e c o m p lain t. A s re c e n tlyh e ld b yth e T e n n e ss e e S u p re m e C o u rt, “m a rital p ro p e rty in c lu d e s a ll p ro p e rty o w n e d a s o f th e d a te o f f ili n g o f th e c o m p lain t oracqui r ed up t o t he dat e of the fi nal di vor ce he ar i ng. ” B al l v. B a ll , - - S. W

. 3d

- - , N o. E 2007- 02220- SC

- R 11- C V , 2010 W L 143854, *4 ( T enn. J anuary14, 2010) ( emphasi s added)

. B as ed on thi s hol di ng, t he r entcol l ect ed b y M r . W el l s aft ert he fi l i ng of t he compl ai nti s a mar i t al as s et , as i tw as acqui r ed bef or e the dat e of the fi nal hear i ng. H ow ever , M r . W el l s cont ends t hatt hi s m ar i t al as s et di d not exi s tatt he t i m e of the fi nal di vor ce he ar i ng as i tw as pai d t o w ar ds t he mort gage on the M ar i t al R es i dence by a g re e m e n t o f

th e p a rties . W h e th e r th e m o n e ye x is te d a t th e tim e o f th e f in a l h e a rin g is i r r el evantbeca us e i t w as actual l y acqui r ed befor e t he fi nal hear i ng as r equi r ed by t he s t atut e. A ddi t i onal l y , M r s . W el l s deni es t hatany s uch agr eement exi s t ed. M or eover , M r . W el l s w asWe no te th at n ei th er p arty p ro v id ed th e co urt w ith th e date th e g if t t o Ms

. D al ey

w as mad e, n or

d id 1 either p arty

pro v ide a citation to the reco rd as t o where we could find this in form ation. H owe v er, upon our in depe nd ent r evie wo f th e re co rd , w e fo un d a co py o f th e ch ec k

g iv en to Ms

. D al ey

att ac he d to Mr

. We ll s Rule 10 06 sum

m ary , which is Exhibit 1 2 o f ev idence presente d at trial and located in Volum e F iv e of the record. -11- or der ed byt he tr i al cour tt o payt he mort g age hi m s el f on t he M ar i t al R es i dence dur i ng t he pendenc yof t he di vor ce pr ocee di ngs . M r . W el l s fai l ed t o pr es entanyevi dence att r i al , ot her t han hi s t es t i m ony , t o s how thathe us ed the moneycol l ect ed fr om t he r entt o payt he m or t gage on the M ar i t al R es i dence

. T he r entw as i ncome fr om a mar i t al ass etand w as acqui r ed bef

or e the dat e of the fi nal hear i ng. A s s uch, t he tr i al cour t pr oper l y cl as s i fi ed i tas a mar i t al as s et

. C ons equent l y , w e fi nd t hatt he evi dence does not pr eponder at e agai ns tt he t r i al cour t ’ s fi ndi ng t hat t he re nt col l ect ed af t ert he fi l i ng of t he compl ai ntw as a mar i t al as s et s u b je c t to d iv is io n .

G ift s

M r . W el l s nexts ubm i t s t hatt he t r i al cour t err ed i n cl as s i fy i ng cert ai n gi ft s he made to third p arti es a s a m arit al asse t. In it s d ivisi o n o f a ssets, the tr ial co u rtcre d it ed ea ch p arty ’s por t i on of t he mar i t al es t at e w i t h m oneyhe ors he had gi ven t o a t hi r d par t y . M r . W el l s w as c re d ited w ith $ 2 ,5 0 0 th a t h e g a v e to S tep h a n ie S m ith (“ M s. S m ith ” ), a w o m e n h e c laim s is hi s daught er , i n 2007, and $1, 000 he gave t o B arbar a D al ey ( “M s . D al ey ”) , t he daught erof a w om an thatM r. W el l s cl ai m s r ai sed him , on January13 , 20 08

. T he tr i al cou rtal so 1 cr edi t ed M r s . W el l s w i t h $2, 000 t hat s he gave t o her s i s t er . T he par t i es do not di s put e that a ll a m o u n ts c re d ite d c a m e f ro m m a ri ta l f

u n d s .

M r. W e lls c o n ten d s th a t th e trial c o u rt e rre d in c re d iti n g h im w ith th e g if ts g iv e n to M s . Sm i t h, as he gave t hatm oneyt o herpr i ort o t he f il ing of t he di vor ce. M r . W el l s does notdispu te th at the funds us ed fort hi s gi ftcame fr om t he j oi ntacc ount , i nt o w hi ch the p a rties h a d p lac e d th e m o n e yre c e iv e d f ro m th e sa le o f

th e C o rd o v a h o m e . M r. W e lls is corr ecti n hi s as s er t i on t hat , beca us e t he ass et w as not ow ned by t he par t i es att he t i m e of the fi l i ng of t he compl ai nt , i ts houl d notbe cons i der ed a mar i t al as s ets ubj ectt o di vi s i on. T enn. C o d e . A n n . § 3 6 -4 -1 2 1 (b )(1 )(A )(2 0 0 2 ); s ee al s o Flan n ary v. Flan n ary , 181 S. W

. 3d 647, 650 ( T enn. 2003)

. H ow ever , beca us e the tr i al cour t di d i ncl ude t he gi ft s i n M r . W el l s por t i on of t he mar i t al es t at e, t he t r i al c o u rt m us thave c oncl uded thatM r . W el l s had di s s i pat ed m arit al asse ts. T en n . C o d e. A n n . § 3 6 -4-1 2 1 (c)(5) (2 0 0 2 ).

I n m aki ng an equi t abl e di s t r i but i on, t he tr i al cour t m ay cons i der w hether a part yhas-12-

d iss ip a ted m a rital o r se p a ra te a ss e ts. T e n n . C o d e . A n n . § 3 6 -4 -1 2 1 (c )(5 ) (2 0 0 2 ); see al so B a ll v . B a ll, 2010 W L 143854, at*5. “D i s s i pat i on of m arit al p rop ertyoccur s w hen one s pous e us es m ar i t al pr oper t y , fr i vol ous l y and w i t hout j us t i fi cat i on, fora purpos e unr el at ed t o t he mar r i age a nd at a t i m e w hen t he mar r i age i s br eaki ng dow n. ” A lt m an v. A lt

m an , 181 S. W

. 3d 676, 6 8 1- 82 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 2005) ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed)

. T o det er m i ne w het her d is s ip a tio n h a s o c c u rr e d , th e tr ia l c o u rt m u s t co n s id e r th e f a c ts o f th e c a s e . B a ll , 2 0 1 0 WL 143854 at *5. T he s pous e cl ai m i ng di s s i pat i on bear s bot h t he bur den of per s uas i on and the b u rd e n o f

p ro d u c tio n . I

d . A ft er t he s pous e has es t abl i s hed a pr i m a f aci a cas e of di s s i pat i on, t he bur den s hi ft s t o t he ot hers pous e t o demonst r at e thatt he expe ndi tur e w as not in a p p ro p ri a te

. A lt

m an , 181 S. W

. 3d at682 ( ci t ati o ns om i t t ed)

. I n det er m i ni ng w het her di s s i pat i on has occurr ed, t he tr i al cour t m u st d i s t i ngui s h betw een di s s i pat i on and d is c re tio n a ry sp e n d in g . B a ll , 2010 W L 143854 at*5. D i s cr et i onarys pendi ng i s s pendi ng that is typ ical o f t h e pa rt ies’ sp en d ing d u ri n g th e m a rr ia g e . I d . T h e trial c o u rt sh o u ld cons i dert he fol l ow i ng fac tors w hen det er m i ni ng w hethera part i cul arexpendi tur e w as dis si pati on : “(1) w hether t he expen diture ben efi t t ed the m arr i age o r w as m ade f or a purpo se unr el at ed t o t he mar r i age; ( 2) w hethert he expe ndi tur e ort r ans act i on occurr ed w hen t he par t i es w er e expe r i enci ng m ar i t al di ffi cul t i es orcont empl at i ng di vor ce; ( 3) w hethert he ex p en d itu re w as e x ce ssive o r d e m in im is ; an d (4 ) w h e th e r th e d iss ip a tin g p a rtyin ten d e d to hi de, depl et e, ordi ver ta mar i t al as s et

. ” A ltm a n , 1 8 1 S .W .3 d a t 6 8 2 (c ita tio n s o m itte d ).

A fter rev iew ing the rec o rd, w e fin d that it su p p o rt s the tr ial co u rt ’s find ing that M r. W el l s di s s i pat ed mar i t al as s et s bym aki ng gi ft s t ot al i ng $2, 500 t o M s . Sm i t h. M r . W el l s gave M s . Sm i t h t he funds at a t i m e w hen t he par t i es w er e havi ng m ar i t al di ffi cul t i es . W hen t he gi ft s w er e m ade, M r . W el l s and M r s . W el l s had sepa r at ed and M r s . W el l s w as l i vi ng w i t h her p a re n ts. M r. W e lls a d m itt e d th a t h e d id n o t h a v e M rs. W e lls’ p e rm iss io n to g iv e M s. S m ith t hi s m oney , nordi d he t el l herhe w as goi ng t o do s o. M r . W ell s claim s that he i s t he bi ol ogi cal fatherof M s . Sm i t h. M r s . W el l s di s put es t hat he i s t he fa t her

. M r . W el l s admi t t ed that h e h as n ev er tak en a p atern itytestto d eterm ine w h ethe r he is, in fac t, M s. S m ith ’s fa ther. H e admi t t ed thathe has neverpai d chi l d s uppor tforM s . Sm i t h, norgi ven h er m oney p rev iou sly

. B ase d o n the rec o rd, t h is C o u rtfin d s tha t M r. W ell s g ift s to M s. S m ith w ere d iss ip a tio n . A c c o rd in g ly , w e f in d th a t th e trial c o u rt d id n o t er r in c re d iti n g M r. W e lls w ith th e $ 2 ,5 0 0 in g if

ts h e m a d e to M s . S m ith u s in g m a ri ta l f u n d s .

W ith re sp e c t to th e g if

t g iv e n to M s. D a ley, w e f in d th a t th e trial c o u rt d id n o t er r in cl as s i fy i ng t hi s gi ft as m ar i t al pr oper t y and cr edi t i ng i t t o M r . W el l s . A nypr oper t yow ned att he t i m e of the fi l i ng of t he compl ai nti s m ar i t al pr operty s ubj ectt o di vi s i on byt he tr i al cour t. T en n . C o d e. A nn. § 36- 4- 121( b) ( 1) ( A ) ( 2002)

. M r . W el l s admi t s t hatt he funds he gave M s . D al ey came fr om the savi ngs acc ount , i nt o w hi ch the part i es had pl ace d t he money t heyr ece i ved fr om t he s al e of the C or dova home. T he r ecor d s how s t hat M r . W el l s di d not-13-

g iv e M s. D a ley th is m o n e yu n ti l J a n u a ry , 1 3 , 2 0 0 8 , af ter th e f ili n g o f th e c o m p lain t. A c c o rd in g ly , the trial c o u rt p ro p e rlyc las sif ied th is g if

t as m a rital p ro p e rtya n d c re d ited it t o M r. W e lls

.

E qui t abl e D i vi s i on

M r . W el l s al s o s ubm i t s t hatt he t r i al cour t err ed i n m aki ng an equi t abl e di vi s i on of t he par t i es ’ m ar i t al pr oper t y . Fi r s t , M r . W el l s cont ends t hat t he t r i al cour t err ed in classi fy i ng cert ai n as s et s as m ar i t al and, t her efor e, t he di s t r i but i on i s i nequi t abl e. Fi ndi ng t hatt he t r i al c o u rt d id n o t er r in its c las sif ica tio n o f

th e p a rtie s a s s e ts , as d isc u ss e d a b o v e , w e f in d th is co n tention to b e w ith o u t m e ri t. S ec o n d , M r. W ell s co n tend s tha t “t h e [ tr ial ] co u rt ’s d i s t r i b u t i o n o f

5 7 % o f t h e a s s e t s t o t h e M r s . We l l s a n d 4 3 % t o M r . We l l s i s i n e q u i t a b l e . ” On appea l , M r . W el l s pr opos es t hatt he di vi s i on s houl d be: for t y - ni n e p er centof t he mar i t al e sta te to M r. W e lls a n d f if ty -o n e p e rc e n t o f th e m a rital e sta te to M rs. W e lls, w ith M rs. W e lls r ece i vi ng appr oxi m at el y$2, 300 m or e th a n M r . W e l l s . Th i s p r opos al i ncl udes r ecl as s i fi cat i on o f th e A rk a n sa s p ro p e rty a s M r. W e lls’ se p a ra te p ro p e rty , lea v in g h im w ith se p a ra te p ro p e rty o f $ 2 8 , 8 2 5 .0 0 (a re q u e st th is C o u rt h a s a lre a d yre jec ted ), an d M rs. W e lls w ith se p a ra te pr oper t yof $987. 63

D i vi di ng a mar i t al es t at e i s nota mechani cal pr oces s ; t he goa l i s t o fas hi on an equi t abl e r emedy cons i der i ng t he non- excl us i ve fac t or s s etfor t h i n T enn. C ode. A nn § 36- 4- 1 2 1 (c):

1. T he dur at i on of t he mar r i age;

2. T he ag e, p hy si cal and m ental health, vo cat i on al ski l l s, empl oy abi l i t y , earni ng capa ci ty , es t at e, fi nanci al liab ili ties a n d f

in a n c ial n e e d s o f

e a c h o f th e p a rties ; 3

. T h e tan g ib le o r i n tan g ib le c o n trib u tio n s b y o n e p a rtyto t he educ at i on, t r ai ni ng ori ncr eas ed ear ni ng pow erof t he o t h e rp a r t y; 4. T he r el at i ve abi l i t yof eac h par t y for futur e ac qui s i t i on of capi t al as s et s and i ncome; 5. T he contr i but i on of ea ch part yt o t he ac qui sit i on, pr es er vat i on, appr eci at i on, depr eci at i on ordi s s i pat i on of t he mar i t al ors epar at e pr oper t y , i ncl udi ng t he co n tr ibu ti o n o f a p arty to the m arriage as h o m em ak er,-14- w age earner orpar entw i t h t he contr i but i on of a pa r t yas hom emakerorw age earner t o be gi ven t he same w ei ght i f ea ch part yhas ful fi l l ed hi s r ol e; 6

. T h e v a l u e o f

t h e s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y o f e a c h p a r t y; 7. T he es t at e of e ach pa r t yatt he t i m e of the mar r i age; 8. T he ec onom i c ci r cumst ance s of eac h par t y at t he t i m e of t he mar r i age; 9. T he t ax conse quence s t o eac h par t yas s oci at ed w i t h t he r eas onabl yfor es eea bl e s al e of the as s etand ot her r ea so nabl yfor es eea bl e expe ns es as s oci at ed w i t h t he a ss e t; 10. T he amount of soci al s ecur i t y benef i t s avai l abl e t o eac h s pous e; 11. A nd s uch ot herfac t ors a s are nec es s aryt o cons i dert he e q u itie s b e tw e e n th e p a rt ie s .

T ri a l cou rt s h av e “ w ide lati tud e in f ash ion ing an eq u it ab le div isi o n o f m arit al pro p e rt y .” A lt m an v. A lt

m an , 181 S. W

. 3d 676, 683 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. 2005)

. T he di vi s i on of m ar i t al p ro p e rty is ro o ted in e q u ity , a n d a d iv isio n o f m a rital p ro p e rty is no t re n d e r e d in e q u itab le m e re ly b e c a u s e it is n o t p re c is e ly eq u a l, Cohen v. Cohen , 937 S. W

. 2d 823, 832 ( T enn. 1 9 9 6 ); E lli

s v . E lli s , 748 S. W

. 2d 424, 427 ( T enn. 1988) orbeca us e e ac h p artydoes not re c e iv e a s h a re o r p o rt io n o f e a c h m a ri ta l a s s e t. Cohen , 937 S. W

. 2d at833 ( ci t i ng B r ow n v. Br o wn , 9 1 3 S .W 2 d 1 6 3 , 1 6 8 (T e n n . C t. A p p . 1 9 9 4 ))

. W e w il l def er to the tr ial co u rt ’s d iv is io n o f

th e m a ri ta l e s ta te u n le s s it is i n c o n s is te n t w ith th e f a c to rs in T e n n . C o d e A n n . § 3 6 -4 -1 2 1 (c ) o r n o t s u p p o rt e d b ya p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f th e e v id e n c e . W

oods v. W

oods , N o. M 2 0 0 2 -01 7 3 6 -C O A -R S -C V , 2 0 0 5 W L 1 6 5 1 7 8 7 , * 4 (T en n . C t. A p p . Ju ly1 2 , 2 0 0 5 ).

I n t he Fi nal D ecree , t he t r i al cour ts t at es t hati tcons i der ed al l of t he above l i s t ed fact or s . A l s o, w hen maki ng i t s di vi s i on fr om t he benc h, t he tr i al cour ts peci fi cal l ys t at ed t hati tcons i der ed al l of t he fa ct or s and found:

T he p art i es w ere m arr i ed O ct ob er 15 , 19 94 , al m ostfi ft een y ears . A r el at i vel yl ong m arr i age. T he a g e of bot h t he - - bot h t he p a r t i e s i s f

o r t y - f i v e . M r s . W e l l s i s a b o u tt o tu r n f o r ty - s i x i n a w e e k o r so . B o th a re in g o o d p h y sic a l a n d m e n tal h e a lth . B o th ar e empl oy abl e and ha ve good voca t i onal sk il l s and ea r ni ng-15- capa ci t y . T he hus band’ s earni ng capa ci t yi s m or e than the w i fe. I n fac ti t ’ s m or e tha n tw ice t hatof t he w i fe. T he C our thas co n side red the re lat ive a b il ityo f e ac h p artyto ac q u ir e f u ture c a p ital a ss e ts a n d in c o m e . A n d , a g a in , M r. W e lls’ a b ili tyis gr ea t e rt h a n t h a to f

M r s . W e l l s b e c a u s e o f h i s g r e a t e re a r ni ng capa ci ty

. T he part i es have made equa l contr i but i ons t o t he acqui s i t i on of m ar i t al pr oper t yas hom emaker , w ag e ear ner , or par ent

. T he part i es have very l i t t l e s epar at e pr oper t y . T heyhad veryl i t t l e es t at e at t he t i m e t hey m arr i ed i n 1994. T he C our thas al s o cons i der ed the amount of Soci al Secur i t yavai l abl e t o t he W if e .

In th e f in a l d e c re e , th e trial c o u rt a w a rd e d M rs. W e lls f if ty -six p e rc e n t o f

th e m a rital e sta te or$122, 091. 81, and aw ar ded t he M r . W el l s for t y - fourper centof t he mar i t al es t at e or $95, 698. 34. I n deny i ng M r . W el l s ’ m ot i on t o al t er or amend, t he t r i al cour tr ecogni zed that it h a d m a d e a m a th e m a tica l er ro r i n c a lcu latin g th e m a rital es tate a n d th e p o rtio n e a c h p a rty w as aw ar ded. I tt hen corr ect ed t hi s err orand s t at ed thatM r s . W el ls’ aw ar d of t he mar i t al es t at e w a s $ 1 2 6 , 2 7 5

. 5 7 , e q u a l i n g 5 6

. 9 % o f t h e ma r i t a l e s t a t e , a n d M r . W e l l s ’ a war d w as $ 9 5 ,6 9 8 .3 4 , o r 4 3 .1 % o f th e m a ri ta l e s ta te

.

M r . W el l s ci t es t o W

oods v. W

oods , N o . M2 0 0 2

- 0 1 7 3 6

- C O A

- R S

- C V , 2 0 0 5 WL 1651787, * 4 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. J ul y12, 2005) , to su p p o rth is co n tention that the tri al co u rt ’s d iv is io n is in e q u ita b le . B e c a u s e o f f a c tu a l d if

f e re n c e s , W

oods is n o t h e lp f

u l to th is C o u rt in t he inst ant cas e. In f

act , i n m ay even be read to suppo rtt he tr i al cou rt ’s divi si on i n thi s case a s th e r e w a s a m u c h h ig h e r d if f e re n c e in th e d iv isio n o f p ro p e rtyb e tw e e n th e p a rties in W oods

. T he fa ctt hatt he part i es i n W oo ds wer e ma r r i e d t wel v e y e a r s i s t h e o n l yf act c o m p a ra b le to th is c a s e . I d . at*9. I n W

oods , t hi s C our tfound t hatt he tr i al cour t ’ s di vi s i on o f m a rital p ro p e rty w a s in e q u itab le a n d re -d iv id e d th e p ro p e rtyto a w a rd th e w if e six ty -six p e rc e n t o f

th e p ro p e rt ya n d th e h u s b a n d th ir ty-f o u r p e rc e n t o f

th e p ro p e rt y . I

d. T h e w if

e in W oods w as found t o have c ont r i but ed a s ubs t ant i al amount of s epar at e as s et s t o pur chas e t he p a rt ie s ’ m a ri ta l h o m e . I d . Fur t her , t hi s C our tfound t hat , w hi l e the hus band i n W oods w as earni ng m or e att he t i m e of di vor ce, t he w i fe ha d t w o bache l or ’ s degr ees w hi l e the hus band had an as s oci at e’ s degr ee, and t he w i fe w as capa bl e of e arni ng m uch more t han s he w as at th e tim e o f

th e d iv o rc e . I

d . Fur t her , t hi s C our tcons i der ed the fa ctt hatt he w i fe i n W oods w o u ld b e th e p ri m a r y r e s i d e n t ia l p a re n t. I d . T he fa ct s betw een W oods an d this case are s im p ly n o t c o m p a ra b le

.

W e have r evi ew ed the r ecor d and fi nd t hatt he tr i al cour td id n oterri n m aki ng an-16-

e q u ita b le d is tr ib u tio n . T he evi dence does not pr eponder at e agai ns tt he tr i al cour t ’ s fac tual f in d in g s. T h e trial co u rt’s d iv isio n o f th e m a rital e sta te g ra n tin g M rs. W e lls a p p ro x im a tely four t een per cent m or e of t he m ar i t al es t at e i s noti ncons i s t entw i t h t he fa ct or s i n T enn. C ode. A nn. § 36- 4- 121( c). T hi s i s es peci al l yt rue cons i der i ng t he fa ctt hatM r . W el l s has an ea rnin g ca p ac ity tw ice th at of M rs. W ell s an d , there fo re, ha s a g rea ter ab il ityto ac q u ir e f u ture asset s, and t h a tt h e p a r t i e s ma d e e q u a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e ma r i t a l e s t a t e . Co n s e q u e n t l y , we f in d th a t th e tr ia l c o u rt ’s d iv is io n o f th e m a ri ta l e s ta te is e q u ita b le

.

I mp u t e d I n c o me

M r s . W el l s s ubm i t s one i s s ue forourr evi ew . She cont ends t hatt he tr i al cour ter r ed i n im pu t i ng i nco m e t o h er i n the am ou nt of $27 , 00 0 a y ear. W hen i m pu t i ng i nco m e t o M rs . W el l s , t he t r i al cour ts peci fi cal l ys t at ed thats he had notdone enough t o fi nd a j ob, fi ndi ng t hat s he w ent m ont hs at a t i m e w i t hout m aki ng any eff or t s w hat s oever , and onl ym ade one per s onal appea r ance w hen s eeki ng a j ob. C l ear l yt he tr i al cour tfound t hatM r s . W el l s w as w i l l f u l l y a n d v o l u n t a r i l y u n e m p l o ye d a n d i m p u t e d a n i n c o m e r e f l e c t i n g h e re a r n i n g c a p a c i t y.

W h e n a trial c o u rt f

in d s th a t a p e rso n is un e m p lo y e d f o r th e p u rp o se s o f

c h ild su p p o rt, t he tr i al cour tm ayi m put e an i ncome t o t hatper s on r efl ect i ng hi s orheri ncome pot ent i al or earni ng capa ci t y . T enn. C om p. R

. & R egs . ch. 1240- 2- 4-

. 04( 3) ( a) ( 2) ( i i ) ( I I )

. T he d e ter m in a tio n o f

w h e th e r a p e rso n is w ill f u llyo r v o lu n tar ily u n e m p lo y e d is a q u e stio n o f f a c t, wh i c h we r e v i e w de novo w ith a p re s u m p tio n o f c o rr e c tn e s s . R eed v. Steadham , N o. E 2009- 00018- C O A

- R 3- C V , 2009 W L 3295123, *2 ( T enn. C t

. A pp. O ct

. 14, 2009)

. O nce t he tr i al c o u rt d e ter m in e s th a t a p a re n t is w ill f u lly a n d v o lu n tar ilyu n d e re m p lo y e d o r u n e m p lo y e d , it m us ti m put e an i ncome t o t hat par ent r efl ect i ng hi s or herearni ng capa ci t y , cons i der i ng t he p a re n t’ s p a s t a n d p re s e n t e m p lo y m e n t, a n d e d u c a tio n a n d t r a i n in g . W ill is v . W ill is , 62 S .W .3 d 7 3 5 , 7 3 9 (T e n n . C t. A p p . 2 0 0 1 ); s ee al s o T enn. C om p. R

. & R egs . ch. 1240- 2- 4- .0 4 (3 )( a )( 2 )( ii) (I I)

.

W e w ill f

irst re v iew th e trial c o u rt’s f in d in g th a t M rs. W e lls w a s v o lu n tar ily unempl oy ed. M r s. W el l s t es t i fi ed thats i nce the s epar at i on s he has l ooked fora j ob i n her fi el d. She i nt r oduced i nt o evi dence a fol dert hatcon tai ned pr oof of a l l of herj ob s ear ch eff or t s fr om 2006 t hr ough t he dat e of the tr i al

. T hi s fol deri s i n t he r ecor d and s how s s ever al i ns t ance s , betw een 2006 and 2009, w her e M r s . W el l s w entform ont hs w i t houtappl y i ng for a j ob

. F rom her r ecords, th is C o u rt can o nlyfi nd t w o inst ances i n thr ee y ears w here M rs . W el l s per s onal l yappea r ed t o appl yfora j ob. T he m aj or i t y of her j ob s ear ch appe ar s t o have been c onduct ed bys i m pl ym ai l i ng, faxi ng oremai l i ng r es um es , w i t h n o ind icati on of anyWe n ote th at in his b rief, Mr. Wells refers to evidence that is not in the record; specifically , Mrs. 2 Wells’ dep osition. Therefo re, this C ourt did not consider this evid ence whe n m akingits d etermination that the trial court did n ot err. -17- fol l ow - up act i on byM r s . W el l s . M r s . W el l s t es t i fi ed that , fr om A pr i l 21, 2008 t hr ough O c to b e r 2 0 0 8 , sh e o n lysu b m itt e d tw o jo b a p p lica tio n s; in N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8 , sh e o n ly s ubm i t t ed one appl i cat i on, and i n D ece m ber 2008, s he s ubm i t t ed t hr ee appl i cat i on s. S he tes tifie d th a t sh e w o u ld lo o k in th e c las sif ied s o r o n lin e , an d th a t sh e w e n t to se v e ra l re tail st ores the w eek o f t he tr i al

. S he ad m i t t ed thatshe had no t app l i ed at anyt em po raryagen ci es. She t es t i fi ed that , des pi t e hereff or t s , s he has not obt ai ned em pl oy m ent

. M r s . W el l s t es t i fi ed th a t sh e h a d tak e n a c las s in m e d ica l co d in g in S e p tem b e r 2 0 0 8 , b u t h a d n o t tak e n th e tes t to become cert i fi ed as of t he dat e of the tr i al

. M r s . W el l s admi t t ed thats he had notappl i ed for anyj obs i n t he medi cal codi ng fi el d, ev en tho u gh cert i fi cat i on w as notr equi r ed. A ft er rev iew ing the rec o rd, w e fin d that the e v iden ce d o es n o t prep o n d era te ag ains t th e tri al co u rt ’s f in d in g th a t M rs . W e lls w a s w illf u lly a n d v o lu n ta ri ly u n e m p lo y e d

.

N extw e w i l l r evi ew t he tr i al cour t ’ s det er m i nat i on that M rs. W el l s has an ea r ni ng capa ci t yof $27, 000 a y ear . I n m aki ng t hi s det er m i nat i on, t he t r i al cour t i s t o cons i dert he p a re n t’ s p a s t a n d p re s e n t e m p lo y m e n t, a n d e d u c a tio n a n d tr a in in g . W ill is , 62 S. W

. 3d at735; see al so T enn. C om p. R

. & R egs . ch. 1240- 2- 4-

. 04( 3 )(a) ( 2) ( i i ) ( I I )

. T he det er m i nat i on of im p u te d in c o m e is a q u e s tio n o f f a c t, W illis , 6 2 S

. W. 3 d a t7 3 9 , wh i c h we r e v i e w de novo w i t h a pr es um pt i on of corr ectnes s . T enn. R

. A pp. P. 13( d)

. A tt r i al , M r s . W el l s t es t i fi ed on d ire ctexam i nati on t hat s he las tw orked in A pri l of 2 00 4 as an a dm i nis t rat i ve assista n t; how ever , on cr os s exami nat i on, s he t es t i fi ed thats he l as tw or ked i n J une of 2 0 0 4

. She pr es ent ed herSoci al Secur i t ys t at ement r efl ect i ng her w or k hi s t or y . I t s how s t hat , i n 2001, s he ea r ned $27, 189, w hi ch i s t he hi ghes ty ear l yearni ngs s how n; i n 2002, s he ear ned $24, 519; in 2 0 0 3 , s h e e a rn e d $ 2 5 ,1 7 1 ; in 2 0 0 4 s h e e a rn e d $ 1 5 ,2 9 8

. 2

A ft er r eview i ng t he record, w e fi nd t hat t he evi den ce does no tprepon derat e against t he tr i al cour t ’ s fi ndi ng t hat M r s . W el l s has t he abi l i t yt o earn $27, 000 a y ear . She has earned t hi s amount pr evi ous l y . Fur t her , w hen s he l as tw or ked ful l t i m e ( w hi ch w as at t he mostfor s i x m ont hs of t he y ear ) s he ea r ned $15, 298 t haty ear . Si nce thatt i m e, M r s . W el l s has t aken a n e ig h tyh o u r m e d ica l co d in g c e rtific a tio n c las s, w h ich sh o u ld a t le a st e n a b le h e r to m a in tain t h e s a m e e a r n i n g c a p a c i t y s h e p r e v i o u s l y h a d , i f n o ti n c r e a s e h e re a r n i n g c a p a c i t y. C o n se q u e n tly , w e a f

f irm th e trial co u rt’s f

in d in g th a t M rs. W e lls is w ill f u llya n d v o lu n tar ily unempl oy ed a n d h i s d e c i s i o n t o i mpu t e i n c o me t o M r s . W e l l s i n t h e a mou n t o f $ 2 7 , 0 00 a y e a r.-18- C oncl usi on

F or t he fo regoi ng reas on s w e affirm t he deci si on of t he tri al cou rt

. O n appeal, M rs . W el l s r eques t s t hat t hi s C our t aw ar d her at t or ney fee s for t hi s appea l

. U s i ng ourdi s cr et i on, w e dec l i ne t o do s o. C os t s of t hi s appea l ar e t axed one

- hal f t o A ppel l ant , M ar k W el l s , and h is s u re ty, an d o n e -h a lf to J o a n n e W e lls , f

o r w h ic h e x e c u tio n m a yis s u e if n e c e s s a ry.

J. S T E V E N S T A F F O R D , J.