MACHADO v. MASVIDAL (2020)

Affirmed. See Paulucci v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 842 So. 2d 797, 803 (Fla. 2003) (“[T]he extent of the court's continuing jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement is circumscribed by the terms of that agreement.”); id. at 803 n.5 (“[I]n cases where the approval of the settlement agreement is by order rather than by incorporating the terms into a final judgment, the statement in the order that the trial court expressly retains jurisdiction to enforce its terms makes it clear that all parties and the court contemplated an express retention of jurisdiction rather than the necessity of an independent lawsuit.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”).

PER CURIAM.