Affirmed. E. Natl Bank v. Glendale Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn, 508 So. 2d 1323, 1324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (“The doctrine of subrogation is generally invoked when one person has satisfied the obligations of another and equity compels that the person discharging the debt stand in the shoes of the person whose claim has been discharged, thereby succeeding to the rights and priorities of the original creditor.”); Kala Invs., Inc. v. Sklar, 538 So. 2d 909, 917 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (“The policy behind the doctrine [of equitable subrogation] is to prevent unjust enrichment by assuring that the person who in equity and good conscience is responsible for the debt is ultimately answerable for its discharge.”); W. Am. Ins. Co. v. Yellow Cab Co. of Orlando, Inc., 495 So. 2d 204, 207 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) (stating that the doctrine of equitable subrogation “may be invoked wherever justice demands its application, irrespective of technical legal rules.”).
PER CURIAM.