Cox v. Cox

We reverse the final order’s requirement that the former husband reimburse the former wife for the children’s ortho*581dontia expenses. Orthodontia treatment is an “extraordinary” dental expense. See Sulman v. Sulman, 510 So.2d 908, 908 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)(explaining that treatment for orthodontic problems “may be included as an extraordinary medical expense”); Grobleski v. Grobleski, 408 So.2d 698, 694 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)(where divorce decree provided that husband was to be responsible for children’s “extraordinary medical and dental bills,” husband was required to pay for children’s orthodontic…