GRUNZKE v. Mason

¶1 AFFIRMED. See Plichta v. Plichta, 899 So.2d 1283, 1285-86 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (holding that Perlow v. Berg-Perlow, 875 So.2d 383 (Fla.2004), does not require a trial court to afford a litigant the opportunity to object to a proposed order prior to the court’s adoption of it if the proposed order merely memorializes rulings the trial court has already made).