Centeno v. Centeno, 109 So. 3d 1259

Final judgment of dissolution incorporated a mediation settlement; rehabilitative alimony set at $5,000/month for five years.
MSA provides non-modifiability of term except the amount can be modifiable if alimony insufficient to meet wife’s needs.
If wife remarries within first three years, husband’s alimony reduces to $2,000/month and term ends in 24 months after remarriage.
If wife remarries between year 3 and year 5, husband’s alimony reduces to $2,000/month for remainder of five-year term; those payments are non-modifiable as to amount and duration.
Extension provision: if term expires and wife remains unmarried, alimony extended $2,000/month for 24 more months; that extension is non-modifiable as to amount and duration.
Husband failed to pay alimony and child support; Wife moved for contempt and enforcement; Husband sought downward modification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there a waiver of modification rights?	Husband waived modification rights by MSA terms.	MSA language clearly makes remarriage provisions nonmodifiable, but initial waiver language is ambiguous.	Waiver insufficiently clear; remand for further proceedings.
Does the MSA clearly limit modification to remarriage scenarios only?	Language allows modification when alimony insufficient, implying potential increases.	Remarriage provisions create a nonmodifiable framework; modification limited to specified events.	Language not clear and express; cannot read as sole modification trigger; remand.

Tapp v. Tapp, 887 So.2d 442 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (waiver of modification rights depends on clear, unambiguous language)
Sasnett v. Sasnett, 683 So.2d 177 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (waiver interpretation principles for alimony provisions)
Cook v. Cook, 94 So.3d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (modification context where custodial changes were described as conditions)
In re Estate of Boyar, 592 So.2d 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (precedent on interpreting conditions precedent with caution)