Case ID: so2d_820/html/1000-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert W. BRUCE, D.C., Appellant, v. Beth HOLLINGSWORTH, et al., Appellees.
    No. 3D01-1454.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 26, 2002.
    Saron & Eisenstadt and William K. Sar-on (St. Petersburg), for appellant.
    Maloy Castro Morales and John H. Ruiz, Miami; Anania, Bandklayder, Blackwell, Baumgarten, Torrieella & Stein and Douglas H. Stein, Miami, and Marleen Co-lominas, Miami, for appellees.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE and LEVY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

No abuse of discretion has been demonstrated in the order under review terminating the status of the appellant as an intervening plaintiff in a class action proceeding. See Southeastern Iron Workers Health Care Plan v. Engle, 813 So.2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Florida Wildlife Fed’n, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Internal Improvement, 707 So.2d 841 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), review denied, 718 So.2d 167 (Fla.1998); Hatcher v. Roberts, 478 So.2d 1083 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 68 (Fla.1986). We observe that the order and its affirmance are necessarily without prejudice to an application, if appropriate, by the appellant for intervention in the future. See Belfort v. Falowski 749 So.2d 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).