Opinion
No. 3D21-1077
01-12-2022
Laura ESTERBROOK, etc., Appellant, v. MASTEC, INC., etc., et al., Appellees.
Leighton Law, P.A.; Jay M. Levy, P.A., and Jay M. Levy, for appellant. Meier, Bonner, Muszynski, O'Dell & Harvey, P.A., and Alexander Muszynski III and Cameron E. Shackelford (Longwood), for appellees.
Leighton Law, P.A.; Jay M. Levy, P.A., and Jay M. Levy, for appellant.
Meier, Bonner, Muszynski, O'Dell & Harvey, P.A., and Alexander Muszynski III and Cameron E. Shackelford (Longwood), for appellees.
Before LOGUE, SCALES and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Garrido v. Markus, Winter & Spitale Law Firm, 358 So. 2d 577, 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (recognizing that the general rule on the "relation back" of substituted party defendants in amended pleadings requires the plaintiff to demonstrate not only that the new and old defendants have such an identity of interest that the substituted defendant will not be prejudiced, but also "that his failure to join the correct parties at the outset had not been due to his own inexcusable neglect" (quoting 3 Moore's Federal Practice, § 15.15)).