SILVER v. GOODRICH (2024)

Rochelle Silver (“the Mother”) appeals the trial court's order finding her in indirect civil contempt for denying Gregory Goodrich (“the Father”) timesharing and granting the Father's motion to modify timesharing. The Mother argues, among other things, that the trial court erred by entering a written order that was inconsistent with its oral pronouncement regarding overnight visitations. We agree on this point, and reverse with instructions that the trial court amend the written order to conform to its prior oral pronouncement. We affirm as to all other issues without further comment.

At the hearing on the motion for contempt and to modify timesharing, the trial court orally pronounced that the Mother would have weekly overnight visitations with the child every Wednesday. The written order, however, grants the Mother overnight visitations on alternating Thursdays.

It is well established that “[w]hen a trial court's written order is inconsistent with its earlier oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement generally controls and the written order must be reversed.” Johansson v. Johansson, 348 So. 3d 1153, 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022); see also Soldatich v. Jones, 290 So. 3d 497, 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020); Cappola v. Cappola, 280 So. 3d 102, 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019); Glick v. Glick, 874 So. 2d 1238, 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). As such, we reverse and remand solely for the trial court to amend the written order to conform to its prior oral pronouncement stating that the Mother shall have weekly overnight visitations with the child every Wednesday.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

Damoorgian, J.

May and Conner, JJ., concur.