Case Name: BEST UNION, INC., Appellant, v. Francisco CRESPO, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2000-02-16
Citations: 752 So. 2d 75
Docket Number: No. 3D98-915
Parties: BEST UNION, INC., Appellant, v. Francisco CRESPO, Appellee.
Judges: Before GODERICH, GREEN, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 752
Pages: 75–75

Head Matter:
BEST UNION, INC., Appellant, v. Francisco CRESPO, Appellee.
No. 3D98-915.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 16, 2000.
Rehearing Denied March 22, 2000.
Kaufman, Miller, Dickstein & Grunspan, Barbara Green and Raymond V. Miller, Miami, for appellant.
Weissman, Dervishi, Borgo, & Nordlund, and Jeffrey M. Weissman, Fort Lauderdale; and Barry S. Franklin, North Miami, for appellee.
Before GODERICH, GREEN, and RAMIREZ, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Because the defendant answered in its interrogatory that it did not contend that "any person or entity other than the named defendant is or may be liable in whole or in part for the claims asserted against the defendant in this lawsuit," the trial court properly excluded evidence that some other person or entity may be liable for the claims asserted against the defendant. See Office Depot, Inc. v. Miller, 584 So.2d 587, 589 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (holding that trial judge has broad discretion in deciding whether to permit or exclude a witness's testimony and that discovery rules should be construed and utilized to avoid "trial by ambush.").
The remaining issues that were raised by the defendant lack merit. We affirm.
Affirmed.