Full Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JACQUELINE SUZANNE GOFF, Appellant, v. RYAN MITCHELL GOFF and COASTAL LIVING ELECTRICAL, LLC, a Florida corporation, Appellees. No. 2D20-2036 January 5, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; G. Keith Cary, Judge. Jacqueline Suzanne Goff, pro se. Linda H. Fried of Fried and Fried, P.A., Fort Myers, for Appellee Ryan Mitchell Goff. No appearance for remaining Appellee. SILBERMAN, Judge. Jacqueline Suzanne Goff (the Former Wife) appeals a final judgment dissolving her marriage to Ryan Mitchell Goff (the Former Husband). She raises eight issues on appeal but has failed to provide a trial transcript or appropriate substitute.1 The Former Husband properly concedes error in two respects as to issues four and eight. We reverse and remand the final judgment solely as to those two items. As to the remainder of the Former Wife’s issues, we affirm the final judgment without discussion. As to issue four, the trial court awarded the marital home to the Former Husband, and he concedes that the trial court should make provision for him to use his best efforts to refinance the marital home to obtain a "mortgage solely in his name within a reasonable time and include a hold harmless provision" if the Former Husband cannot obtain refinancing. Patel v. Patel, 162 So. 3d 165, 166 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). We reverse and remand for entry of an amended final judgment to the extent that the trial court shall (1) direct the Former Husband to use his best efforts to refinance 1 Without a transcript or a statement of the evidence, a reversal is appropriate only when "an error of law is apparent on the face of the judgment." Banks v. Banks, 168 So. 3d 273, 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). 2 the marital home within a reasonable time in order to relieve the Former Wife of liability on the existing mortgage and (2) "include a hold harmless provision in the amended final judgment in the event the [F]ormer [H]usband is unable to obtain refinancing." Id. As to issue eight and the subject of child support, the trial court found "that given the substantial time that each party will have with the children and their relative income, neither party shall pay child support to the other." The Former Husband contends that the child support guidelines worksheet indicated, based on the Former Wife's income plus alimony, that she would owe a nominal amount of support under the parenting plan. He asserts that the trial court acted within its discretion in not requiring the Former Wife to pay the nominal amount of support and that he did not raise an objection. The Former Husband concedes that the trial court inadvertently failed to attach the worksheet to the final judgment. In determining child support, it is error to fail to include in the final judgment a child support guidelines worksheet. J.A.D. v. K.M.A., 264 So. 3d 1080, 1083 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). Thus, we direct the 3 trial court to attach the child support guidelines worksheet to the amended final judgment on remand. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. MORRIS, C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication. 4