Case Name: Mary Susan ERICKSON, Appellant/Petitioner, v. James Edward ERICKSON, Appellee/Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-03-05
Citations: 668 So. 2d 1093
Docket Number: No. 94-2863
Parties: Mary Susan ERICKSON, Appellant/Petitioner, v. James Edward ERICKSON, Appellee/Respondent.
Judges: MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 668
Pages: 1093–1094

Head Matter:
Mary Susan ERICKSON, Appellant/Petitioner, v. James Edward ERICKSON, Appellee/Respondent.
No. 94-2863.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
March 5, 1996.
W. Gregg McCaulie of Hand, Drew, Show-alter, Mercier, Kelly & McCaulie, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant/Petitioner.
No appearance, for Appellee/Respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the final order of dissolution of Mary Susan Erickson and James Edward Erickson. The parties entered into a stipulated agreement just prior to the final hearing; the agreement was recited at the hearing; the recitation contained no provision regarding the federal income tax deduction for the parties' only child. The final judgment however contains a paragraph (six) relating to the federal income tax deduction. The inclusion in the final judgment of a provision that was not in the parties' agreement is error. See Steiner v. Steiner, 638 So.2d 174, 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
We therefore reverse and remand for entry of a corrected final judgment, deleting paragraph six. We affirm in all other respects.
MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.