Wal-Mart Stores East, Lp v. Dorothy Wynn

Opinion

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 6D2023-1940 Lower Tribunal No. 2018-CA-000160-O _____________________________

WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P.,

Appellant, v.

DOROTHY WYNN,

Appellee. _____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County. A. James Craner, Judge.

July 10, 2026

ON MOTION TO WITHHOLD ISSUANCE OF MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s motion to withhold issuance of mandate, docketed April 6,

2026, is denied.

WOZNIAK and MIZE, JJ., concur. SMITH, J., dissents, with opinion. SMITH, J., dissents.

I respectfully dissent to the majority’s denial of Appellant’s motion to

withhold issuance of mandate. In Appellant’s motion and Appellee’s response, both

parties agree upon the factors for this Court to consider: “Factors to be considered

are the likelihood that jurisdiction will be accepted by the supreme court, the

likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, the likelihood of harm if no stay is

granted, and the remediable quality of any such harm.” Fla. R. App. P. 9.120

committee note to 1977 amendment. For the reasons fully expressed in my

concurrence in Crecelius v. Rizzitano, 430 So. 3d 268, 280 (Fla. 6th DCA 2026),

which is reiterated in small part in my concurrence in result in this case, I believe

upon consideration of the above listed factors that withholding issuance of the

mandate would be appropriate in this case. I would grant Appellant’s motion and

withhold issuance of the mandate pending the Florida Supreme Court’s

determination of whether to invoke jurisdiction to review the decision in this case.

_____________________________

Jack R. Reiter, Sydney M. Feldman, and Lucia, L. Leoni, of GrayRobinson, P.A., Miami, for Appellant.

Brian J. Lee, of Morgan & Morgan, Jacksonville, for Appellee.