WPC$ h9sìsG$0st^sc`4O7P!'c=X D\޶O2k B='sg%[%"'w@ Rd/{!HBCOpKQ+Q[ԢS 4A_''((?XQ|'=@ctph6aOAlڽINK#iYF+3FUBn.'cJ,_`TqK 面Qp^}:Cj H/>_i 16 C^ ibi+PlZVm}su@-8EX'YFu!,EPz\Ev!,PCSC?RfQyD'>ccKw^\5'`j#q}7!ӏI!eLT[6CgG6x%0țJ[F: s ~N} &I*`#@UN %W 0:] 0U 0 0 0 0S 0  0 0l 0 0 0y 0J 0 0 0Q 0 0 0" 0 0q 0? 0 0 0= 0 0s 0UX>U*^ w4* m,C 0~ 0DE  b'"/"'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'#'# B#HP LaserJet 4250 PCL 60(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,*+ (_2623  ..*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   &&& $_   x 23   x   \  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial/u3  =M3:i+003|xU z )($USUS.,    1    _% XXThisCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifythe  actionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whena t caseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbe 8 published,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninanyunrelatedcase.#X\X% e#(.(3($ !USUS.,      0  (#$  0    )($USUS.,    2    _% XXTwoofthechildrenofMotherandFatherwereoutoftheircustodyandadoptedbyrelativesasofthedate  ofthehearinginthiscause.OneofthosechildrenwasthesubjectofFathersClassAfelonyconviction.#X\X% e#- - J.L.C.V.R.C.E.R.C.Grundy COAHighersReguliHobbsCordellE]videnceW]hileCordellsC.K.G. )($USUS.,    3    _% XXTherearenoissuesonappealrelatingtoMother. d !USUS.,  _ X\XXX $X X\,8\XXdd8       ` # X\X $\##X\XX X\=# X\XXX\ X X\IN# X\X X# X X\ԀTHE# X\X # X X\ԀCOURT# X\X # X X\ԀOF# X\X *# X X\ԀAPPEALS# X\X o# X X\ԀOF# X\X # X X\ԀTENNESSEE    ?+ ` hp x X?# X\X # X X\@..AT# X\X # X X\ԀNASHVILLE & # X\X ##X\XX X\9# X\XXX\ $X X\SUBMITTED# X\X $# $X X\ԀON# X\X $# $X X\ԀBRIEFS# X\X $4# $X X\ԀJULY# X\X $}# $X X\Ԁ14,# X\X $# $X X\Ԁ2005# X\X $ # $X X\Ԁ L # X\X $Q##X\XX X\# X\XXX\#X\XX X\#  X\XXX\ $X X\IN# X\X $1# $X X\ԀTHE# X\X $u# $X X\ԀMATTER# X\X $# $X X\ԀOF:# X\X $# $X X\ԀJ.L.C.,# X\X $J# $X X\ԀV.R.C.# X\X $# $X X\Ԁand# X\X $# $X X\ԀE.R.C. J # X\X $# # $X X\JOHN# X\X $ # $X X\ԀRICHARD# X\X $ # $X X\ԀSIMMONS,# X\X $ # $X X\Ԁ# X\X $\ ##X\XX X\# X\XX\ $ X\et# X\X. $ # $ X\Ԁal.# X\X. $( ##X\X X\ # X\XXX\ $X X\Ԁv.# X\X $ # $X X\ԀJAMES# X\X $ # $X X\ԀCORDELL,# X\X $@ # $X X\Ԁ# X\X $ ##X\XX X\ # X\XX\ $ X\et# X\X. $ # $ X\Ԁal# X\X. $W ##X\X X\ # X\XXX\ $X X\.  ^ # X\X $ ##X\XX X\ # X\XXX\#X\XX X\\# X\XXX\DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforGrundyCounty  ^ No.A-111JeffreyF.Stewart,Chancellor  J ___________________________ "  No.M2004-00538-_COA_-R3-CVFiledDecember28,_2005 % X X\#%  % #! %  _     #%  !###X\X% #@BB_____________________________      Thisisachildsupportcase.Custodyoftheminorchildrenwasremovedfromthebiologicalfather, Z andhewasconvictedofandincarceratedforaggravatedsexualbatteryofhischildandthe F manufactureofmethamphetamine.Thecustodiansofthechildrenpetitionedtoterminatethe 2 fathersparentalrights,adoptthechildren,andobtainbackchildsupportfromthefather.Thefather n owned1500acresoffarmland.Thetrialcourtterminatedthefathersparentalrights,assessedback  Z childsupportagainsthim,foundhimvoluntarilyunderemployedand,basedontheincome F producingfarmland,imputedanearningpotentialof$45,000.Thecustodiansappeal,arguingthat 2 thetrialcourterredbynotimputingahigherearningcapacitytothebiologicalfather.Weaffirm.  @   Tenn.R.App.P.3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmed   HollyM.Kirby,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidR.Farmer,J.joined,and ~ AlanE.Highers,J.,dissented. j ConnieReguli,Brentwood,TN,forPetitioner/Appellants,JohnRichardSimmonsandKimberly B! DawnSimmons ."~ R.DeeHobbs,Chattanooga,TN,forRespondent/AppelleeJamesL.Cordell $V!   &"$ @!MEMORANDUMOPINION( *#  1      ׈     RespondentVickiR.Cordell( Mother)andRespondent/AppellantJamesL.Cordell  ( Father)weremarriedin1992andhadfivechildren,threeofwhomarethesubjectofthisappeal.+ *#  2      ׀ t Thefamilylivedonapproximately1500acresoffarmlandinGrundyCountythatFatherinherited ` fromhisparents.TheylivedinthelargehomeoccupiedbyFathersparentsbeforetheydied.Father L  hadfarmedthelandandraisedlivestockandcuttimberforsomethirtyyears.Atthetimeofthe 8  hearinginthiscause,Fatherwasalittleoverfiftyyearsold,andthethreechildrenwereages10,9 $ t and5yearsold.  `   In1998,thethreechildrenwereremovedfromthecustodyofMotherandFatherandtaken  8  intoprotectivecustodybytheStateofTennesseeDepartmentofChildrensServices( DCS).On $  February18,1999,theJuvenileCourtofGrundyCountyenteredanorderfindingthechildrentobe   dependentandneglected.PhysicalcustodyofthechildrenwasawardedtoPetitioner/Appellants   JohnRichardSimmonsandKimberlyDawnSimmons( theSimmons).JohnSimmonswasa   cousinofFather.TheSimmonslivedonafarmneartheCordellsfarm.     InMarch1999,FatherpledguiltytoaClassAfelony,aggravatedsexualbatteryofachild, \ fortherapeofoneofhischildren,notthesubjectofthisappeal.Forthisoffense,hewassentenced H toatenyearprisonterm.Subsequently,bothMotherandFatherpledguiltytothemanufactureof 4 methamphetamine.Motherwassentencedtoasixyearprisonterm,andFatherreceivedan  p additionalprisontermtobeservedconsecutivelywithhissentenceforaggravatedsexualbattery.  \   OnJune1,2001,theSimmonsfiledapetitionintheChanceryCourtofGrundyCounty 4 seekingtoterminatetheparentalrightsofbothMotherandFatherandtoadoptthethreechildren.   TheysubsequentlyamendedtheirpetitiontoincludearequestforchildsupportfromFather,   retroactivetothedateonwhichtheyreceivedcustodyofthechildren,inJanuary1999.Mothers  childsupportobligationwaspreviouslyadjudicatedinJuvenileCourtandisnotthesubjectofthis  appeal.    AtthetrialonJanuary8,2004,neitherMothernorFathercontestedeitherthetermination X  oftheirparentalrightsortheadoptionofthechildrenbytheSimmons.SinceMotherschildsupport D! obligationhadpreviouslybeenestablished,thatwasnotanissueattrial.Fatherconcededthathe 0"  hadsomeobligationofchildsupport,andthetrialproceededonthesingleissueofestablishingthe #l! amountofFatherschildsupportobligationfromJanuary1999tothedateoftheterminationofhis $X" parentalrights. $D # Ї  Attrial,itwasundisputedthatapproximately500acresofFatherslandwasfarmland,500  acreswaspasture,and500acreswastimber.InconnectionwithFathersguiltypleaonthe  methamphetaminecharge,300acresofhislandwasforfeitedtothefederalgovernment.Apparently  thelandwasbeingrentedforanominalsum,approximatelyequalofthetaxesdue.TheSimmons t presentedtestimonyfromseveralwitnessesonFathersfarmingoperationspriortohisincarceration ` andthegrossincomethatcouldbeobtainedfromfarmingtheland,raisinglivestock,permitting L  timbertobecut,andrentalincome.Thewitnessestestifiedthatthepotentialincometobederived 8  fromthelandwasapproximately$234,000.ManyofFathersfinancialrecordsweredestroyedin $ t afirein1999thatburneddownthefamilyhomeonthefarm.TheonlyevidenceofFathersincome  ` priortohisincarcerationwerehis1998and1999federaltaxreturns,showinganadjustedgross  L  incomeof$26,591.00and$30,026.00,respectively.  8    Thetrialcourtrenderedanoralrulingattheconclusionofthetrial,andawrittenorderwas   enteredonFebruary17,2004.TheparentalrightsofbothMotherandFatherwereterminatedon   multiplegrounds,andtheSimmonswerepermittedtoadoptthechildren.IntheFebruary17,2004   order,thetrialcourtstated:   8  ...[E]videncewasputbeforethisCourtregardingthepotentialincomeavailableto \ [Father],inspiteofhisincarceration.H   @$$(*** 4 8   ` [Father]istheowneroflandthathasincomepotentialfromagriculture  p includingtheharvestingofhay,theraisingofcattleandtheraisingofchickens.The  \ testimonyofwitnessesshowsthatthepotentialgross(lessreasonableexpenses) H incomefromhayon500acresis$58,500peryearandon400acresis$42,600per 4 year.Testimonyalsoshowsthat500acresofpasturecouldproduceagrossincome   (lessreasonableexpenses)of$145,000peryear.Testimonyalsoshowthatthree   chickenhouseswouldproducegrossincome(lessreasonableexpenses)of$30,000.  [Fathers]incometaxreturnshowsagrossincomeof$30,026.Therearenotax  recordsavailableshowingtheincomeproducedwhenthefarmwasinfull  production.l   8   ` TheCourtalsofindsthat[MotherandFather]willfullyengagedincriminal D! conductthathascausedthemtobeincarcerated.0"    @$$(*** #l! 8   ` Itisthereforeordered,adjudgedanddecreedthat[Father]isvoluntarily $X" underemployedand[theSimmons]areentitledtoajudgmentforchildsupportdue $D # tothemfromJanuary1999untilthedateofthishearing.Itisorderedthat[Father] %0!$ hasanearningpotentialof$45,000peryear.Childsupportforthreechildrenonthis &"% grossincomeis$1,193...permonth.Theaccumulatedarrearageonthismonthly '#& obligationis$71,580....(#'     )$( TheSimmonswerethenawardedajudgmentforthechildsupportarrearageintheamountof  $71,580.Fromthisorder,theSimmonsnowappeal.. *#  3           Onappeal,theSimmonsarguethatthetrialcourterredinfindingFathersearningcapacity t tobeonly$45,000.Despitehisincarceration,theycontend,theevidencesupportsafindingthathe ` couldproduceincomefromhisfarmlandwellinexcessofthatamount,andtheyaskthisCourtto L  imputetoFatheranearningpotentialofatleast$117,000. 8    Onappeal,Fatherstipulatedthatthereiscauseforterminatinghisparentalrights.Inhis  ` appellatebrief,hestates: ...[W]hile[Father]disagreeswiththelowercourtsconclusionthathe  L  wasvoluntarilyunderemployedasaresultofbeingincarcerated,thisfindingisnotchallengedby  8  himonappeal.HecharacterizestheevidenceofferedbytheSimmonsas remoteand $   speculative,andstates:   8  Ratherthanrelyonconjecture,thetrialcourtconsideredtheactualincomeearnedby   [Father].Then,havingfoundthathewasvoluntarilyunemployed,thelowercourt   imputesafiftypercentincreasetotheactualincomeof[Father]inordertoreacha p supposedincomelevelof$45,000peryear.Thisconclusionissupportedbyboththe \ recordandthelaw.H   @  '*** 4 8  Thetrialcourt...focused...ontheevidenceofincomeactuallyearned...[and]  p correctlyfoundthatthefarmcouldhavebeenearningmoreincome,andthecourts  \ imputationofanadditionalfiftypercentofincometo[Father]isentirelyreasonable H onthisrecordandshouldnotbeoverturned.4   Father,therefore,expresslywaivesallissuesthathecouldraiseonappeal,includingissuesrelated   totheterminationofhisparentalrightsandthefindingofvoluntaryunderemployment.Hecontends  thatanyincreaseinthelevelofearningpotentialattributedtohimwouldbebasedonspeculative  evidence,andasksthisCourtonappealto sustainthedecisionbelowanddismisstheappeal.    Onappeal,thetrialcourtsfindingsoffactareaccordedapresumptionofcorrectness,unless X  theevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Tenn.R.App.P.13(d).Thetrialcourtslegalconclusions D! arerevieweddenovo,withnopresumptionofcorrectness. InreC.K.G. ,173S.W.3d714,721 0"  (Tenn.2005). #l!   Fromourreviewoftherecord,wemustagreewithFatherthattheevidenceinthisrecordis $D # insufficienttosupportanincreaseintheearningcapacityimputedtohimfromthefarmlandhe %0!$ holds.Nodoubthisfarmlandcanbeutilizedtogeneratesupportforhischildren,despitehis &"% incarceration,buttheevidencedoesnotsupporttheincreasesoughtbytheSimmonsonappeal. '#& Therefore,wemustholdinfavorofFatherandaffirmthetrialcourtsawardtotheSimmonsofa (#' judgmentintheamountof$71,580.00. )$( Ї  Thedecisionofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealareawardedagainstthe  Petitioner/AppellantsJohnRichardSimmonsandKimberlyDawnSimmons,andtheirsurety,for  whichexecutionmayissue,ifnecessary.     `     h   __________________________________________ $ t    `     h   HOLLYM.KIRBY,JUDGE  `