Walter Javier Arrazola Mendivil v. the Florida Bar
This text of Walter Javier Arrazola Mendivil v. the Florida Bar (Walter Javier Arrazola Mendivil v. the Florida Bar) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Supreme Court of Florida THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2026
Walter Javier Arrazola SC2026-0210 Mendivil, Petitioner(s) v.
The Florida Bar, Respondent(s)
Because Petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the
relief requested, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly,
the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied. See Huffman v.
State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000). No motion for rehearing will
be considered.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. TANENBAUM, J., concurs with an opinion.
TANENBAUM, J., concurring.
It is true that the petitioner has failed facially to satisfy the
elements necessary to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus.
Then again, petitioning for an extraordinary writ against The Florida
Bar is, frankly, strange. To do so, essentially, is to ask this court to CASE NO.: SC2026-0210 Page Two
issue an extraordinary writ to itself. The Florida Bar is a mere
agency of this court, and its officers act only under this court’s
authority. See Fla. Bar v. McCain, 330 So. 2d 712, 714 (Fla. 1976)
(noting that the Bar is not “an independent agent,” so when dealing
with the Bar’s disciplinary powers, “we are actually talking about
our own authority”). Moreover, licensing and certifications are
matters of privilege, not of right; mandamus could not be an
appropriate writ in this context anyway.
We can ensure the Bar’s compliance with our own internal
rules, within our discretion, by simple order, when appropriate. Cf.
In re Proposed Disciplinary Action by Fla. Bar Against Cir. Judge,
103 So. 2d 632, 635 (Fla. 1958) (issuing “cease and desist” order to
the Bar’s Board of Governors). The petitioner has not shown a lack
of compliance warranting our involvement.
A True Copy Test:
SC2026-0210 5/21/2026
SC2026-0210 5/21/2026 CASE NO.: SC2026-0210 Page Three
SO
Served:
JOSHUA E. DOYLE WALTER JAVIER ARRAZOLA MENDIVIL
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Walter Javier Arrazola Mendivil v. the Florida Bar, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walter-javier-arrazola-mendivil-v-the-florida-bar-fla-2026.