Walmart Stores East, Lp v. Bettie Leverette

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: February 17, 2026
• Docket: A24A0115
• Status: Published

Opinion

FOURTH DIVISION BROWN, C. J., DILLARD, P. J., and PADGETT, J.

NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules

February 17, 2026

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A24A0115. WALMART STORES EAST, LP v. LEVERETTE.

BROWN, Chief Judge.

In Walmart Stores E., LP v. Leverette, 371 Ga. App. 543 (901 SE2d 607) (2024),

this Court affirmed a jury verdict in favor of Bettie Leverette against Wal-mart Stores

East, LP (“Walmart”). In Walmart Stores E., LP v. Leverette, 321 Ga. 854 (917 SE2d

702) (2025) (“Walmart II”), the Supreme Court vacated our decision after

concluding that the $1 million award in this case exceeds the limits on nominal

damages under Georgia law. However, the Court explained that its decision did not

resolve whether the jury’s verdict in this case must ultimately be vacated. For one thing, [Leverette] contends that the jury’s verdict should not be disturbed because any error in it was invited by [Walmart]. For another, given the particular combination of jury instructions, an unusual special verdict form, and the overall jury verdict in this case, the appropriate remedy, if any, is not clear.

Id. at 855. The Court ultimately left these decisions “for the courts below to resolve

on remand.” Id.

We now vacate Division 1 of our earlier opinion and in place of that Division we

adopt as our own the Supreme Court’s opinion in Walmart II.1 As to the remaining

issues identified in Walmart II, we remand this case to the trial court to decide them

in the first instance.2

Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction. Dillard, P.J., and Padgett, J.,

concur.

1 “Because the Supreme Court neither addressed nor considered Division [2] of our [earlier] opinion . . ., and that Division is not inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s own opinion, Division [2] becomes binding upon the return of the remittitur.” Ashley v. State, 340 Ga. App. 539, 540 (798 SE2d 235) (2017) (citation and punctuation omitted). 2 Walmart’s motion to determine issues on remand is denied. 2