Rotta v. Rotta

This is an appeal from a judgment entered consequent to our opinion in Rotta v. Rotta, 34 So.3d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). Contrary to the appellant’s argument, we find the decision under review not only in full accordance with, but mandatorily required, by our previous opinion. See, e.g., Pelican Real Estate & Dev. Co. v. Boone, 60 So.3d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Torres v. Jones, 652 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

Affirmed.

LAGOA, J„ and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge, concur.