MILLER v. MILLER (2021)

This matter again comes before us following the modification of an agreed-upon parenting plan between Steven and Caroline Miller. We previously reversed in part, directing the trial court to enter an amended supplemental final judgment and to reconsider Mr. Miller's demand for attorney's fees. See Miller v. Miller, 302 So. 3d 457, 463 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (“Miller I”). We affirm the trial court's conclusion that Mr. Miller is not entitled to attorney's fees in this proceeding. Furthermore, with one exception, the trial court followed our mandate in Miller I. We directed the trial court to “reflect the parties' original agreement concerning child support.” This agreement, memorialized in section 5.1 of the marital settlement agreement, is not contained in section 8, the child support/reimbursement section, of the amended supplemental final judgment. We remand for entry of a second amended supplemental final judgment to contain this language, which is to be memorialized within twenty days of the issuance of our mandate.¹ We otherwise affirm.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with DIRECTIONS.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We dictate this time frame in an effort to minimize the likelihood of further filings of voluminous, expensive, and unnecessary post-appellate motions.

PER CURIAM.

EDWARDS, TRAVER and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.