ROSADO v. SAMUELSEN (2025)

Appellant Maria Rosado appeals the circuit court's final judgment of paternity and related relief, its order on retroactive child support, and its orders denying rehearing. We affirm without discussion as to all issues except one. As Appellant correctly argues, the circuit court's written order did not include a requirement that the parties administer to J.E.S. (“Child”) his prescribed medication, even though the court made the following oral ruling during the evidentiary hearing held in this matter: “Here's another thing that's going to be in [the order]. Child must take all prescribed medication.” The court's final judgment of paternity and related relief does not contain any requirement that Child take his prescribed medication, only that the parties must evenly split medication expenses. Therefore, we reverse the order insofar as it fails to include this orally pronounced requirement, and we remand for the court to issue an amended order that conforms to its oral pronouncement. See Saucier v. Nowak, 200 So. 3d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). In all other respects, we affirm.

Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, and Remanded with instructions.

Per Curiam.

Edwards, C.J., and Wallis and Pratt, JJ., concur.