CURIAM. The former wife appeals a non-final order denying her motion to hold the former husband in contempt for failing to pay his one-half share of the college expenses of the parties’ oldest son, pursuant to the parties’ Marital Settlement Agreement. We reverse because, absent a pending motion to modify, the trial court lacked authority to modify the terms of the marital settlement agreement by ordering that the former husband be required to reimburse the former wife for only one-half of the cost of the oldest son’s college education, based on what the cost would have been if the child had attended a state university in Florida on his Bright Futures scholarship. See Chaphe v. Chaphe, 19 So.3d 1019, 1023-24 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (<HOLDING>). A trial court is without jurisdiction to
holding that the district court and this court had subject matter jurisdiction over the defendants motion for modification of sentence based on amendment 706 even though the defendant filed the motion before march 3 2008 because the district court ruled on the motion after that date holding that where there was no motion pending before the trial court for modification of the martial settlement agreement or the judgment of dissolution the trial court lacked jurisdiction to reduce the fathers obligations for the childrens educational expenses holding that this court lacked preliminary authority to review the district courts jurisdiction because there was no immediately appealable order before the court holding that although evidence concerning the statutory factors was presented by the parties during the dissolution hearing the trial courts failure to set forth findings of fact in the dissolution judgment required reversal holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion