Case ID: so3d_184/html/1149-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Zulema O’CONNOR, Appellant, v. Thomas O’CONNOR, Appellee.
    No. 2D14-3690.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Oct. 30, 2015.
    Zulema O’Connor, pro se.
    James R. Kramer, Tampa, for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Zulema O’Connor appeals from the final judgment dissolving her marriage to Thomas O’Connor. She challenges various aspects of the final judgment that pertain to the marital home, equitable distribution, time-sharing, child support, and alimony. There- is no transcript of the final hearing in the record, but the record contains “FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FROM MAY 14, 2014, TRIAL.”

In the absence of a transcript, the trial court’s factual findings are presumed correct, and our review is limited to errors apparent on the face of the judgment. See Mobley v. Mobley, 18 So.3d 724, 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that in the absence of a hearing transcript, an appellate court is limited to correcting errors of law apparent on the face of the judgment). Because we find no error in the trial court’s rulings, we affirm. However, the parties acknowledge that a discrepancy exists between paragraphs nine and twenty-five of the final judgment concerning the child support award. Therefore, we remand to the trial court for correction of the apparent scrivener’s error by amended final judgment. See Mitchell v. Mitchell, 841 So.2d 564, 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

Affirmed; remanded for correction of judgment.

KELLY, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.