Assigned on Briefs December 4, 2017
from the Chancery Court for Tipton County No. 25871 William
C. Cole, Chancellor
challenges the trial court's correction of the final
divorce decree pursuant to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.01 by
correcting the type of alimony awarded and adding an end date
for the payment of alimony. Finding no abuse of discretion,
we affirm the decision of the trial court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery
L. Green, Millington, Tennessee, for the appellant, Michelle
Blaise Chastain, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee,
Jeffrey Bryan Duggan.
D. Bennett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which
Charles D. Susano, Jr., and Kenny W. Armstrong, JJ., joined.
D. BENNETT, JUDGE
Denise Duggan ("Wife") filed a complaint for
divorce against Jeffrey Bryan Duggan ("Husband") on
March 5, 2008. A final hearing was held on October 14, 2010,
and the trial court entered a final decree on June 30, 2011.
The final decree states, in pertinent part, as follows:
4. It further appearing to the Court that the Plaintiff has
been a homemaker and is currently in school with an
anticipated date of graduation being in August, 2011, and it
is further anticipated that the Plaintiff will finish all her
prerequisites and will at that point in time be qualified to
5. It appearing to the Court that the Plaintiff is
economically disadvantaged as compared to the Defendant; that
there is a need for alimony and an ability to pay.
6. It further appearing to the Court that the Defendant
should pay to the Plaintiff a total monthly sum of $2,
300.00, of which $854.00 is child support and the remaining
amount shall be deemed rehabilitative alimony.
2013, Wife filed a petition for civil contempt and to modify
the parenting plan and child support. As a result of this
petition, the trial court entered an order on March 5, 2014,
providing, inter alia, that "[e]xcept as
expressly modified by the terms of this Order, all terms of
the . . . June 30, 2011 Final Decree of Divorce shall remain
in full force and effect."
April 2016, Husband filed a petition to modify child support
based upon the parties' older child reaching the age of
majority. Wife admitted that the child had reached majority
but denied that Husband was entitled to a reduction in child
support. The matter was heard on June 27, 2016, and, on