# FILED March 1, 1996 Cecil Crowson, Jr . App ellate C ou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF AP PEALS OF

TENNESSEE, WESTE RN SECTION AT JACKS ON

_______________________________________________________ ) FLOYD EZELL JACKSON, ) Shelby County Circuit Court ) No. 145399 R.D. Plaintiff

/Appella nt. ) ) VS. ) C. A. No. 02A01-9510-CV-00214 ) STELLA L. SMITH JACKSON, ) ) Defendant/Appellee. ) )

______________________________________________________________________________ From the Circuit Cou

rt of Shel by C ounty

at Memphis . Honorable W

illiam O'Hearn, Judge

by Designat

ion Stephen R. Leffler , Memphis, Tennessee Attorney for Plain tiff/App ellant. Mitchell D. Moskovitz , Memphis, Tennessee Attorney for D efendant/Appellee. OPINION FIL

ED: AFFI RMED FARMER, J. CRAWFORD, P.J., W.S. : (Concur s) LILLARD, J. : (Concur s)The marriage between Floyd Ezell Jackson (Husband) and Stella L. Jackson (Wife) endedafter some 21 y ears when the trial court found that both parties shal l be awar ded a divorce pursuant to T.C.A. § 36-4-129.

The trial court divided the marital property a nd awarded

Wife rehabilitative alimony of $1,000 per month for 60 months and $750 per month for

an additional 24 months following the 60 month period. It is from the award of a limonythat Husband appeals, asking this Court to "decree an appropriate alimony

award under all the circumstances of this ca use." In determining whether spousal support is appropriate and then d eterm ining the amount and dura tion, the c ourt is to

consider all relevant factors, including those set forth at T.C.A. § 36-5-101 (d)(1) . At the time of tr ial, Husband was age 47 and Wife ag e 52. Husband had been em ployed by Fede ral Express for approximately 11 y ears and earned in excess of $40,0 00 y early . Wife's gross monthly income f rom two jobs was $967. Husbandhas a bachelor's and master' s degree and Wife le ss than two

ye ars of c ollege . Husband suffer s from mig

raine he adache s. Need and the a

bility to pay are the two most imp or tant factors in determining the appro priate amount of alimony. Barnhill v. Ba rnhill , 826 S.W.2d 443, 455, (Tenn. App. 1991). When questioned by his attorney at trial as to what he felt a reasonab le am ount of al imony would be, Husband testified that "[b]ecause of her professional bac kground, I would think that any one could be reha bilitated in five yea

rs, honestly, and a thousand dollar s a month for three or four years andfinish it up with, say, $750 a month for a year or two to give us a total of five y ears. Th at seems perfectly reasonable to me." Our review of this record convinces us that the trial court considered all re levant factors, including those set forth in the statute. We further a gree that the t

rial cour t properl y assessed the need

commensu

rate wit h the abil ity t o pay . Having

reviewed this record, we find that t he evide nce doe s not prep onderat e aga inst the tr ial cour t's find ings. Wife has asked

that this case be remanded to the trial court for a determination of an appropr iate awa rd for he r attorne y' s fees incurred

as a res ult of Husb and's a ppeal. This we decline to do. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed and c osts are taxed to the appellant, for which ex ec ut io n m ay i ss ue if

ne ce ss ar y._______________________________ FAR MER , J.

______________________________ CRAWFORD, P.J., W.S. (Conc urs)

______________________________ LI LL ARD, J. (Conc

urs)