final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County,
Reemberto Diaz, Judge. Lower Tribunal No. 16-9731
Santaniello, Petrillo & Jones, and Edgardo Ferreyra, Jr.,
Daniel J. Santaniello (Boca Raton), Heather M. Calhoon, and
Daniel S. Weinger, for appellant.
Haggard Law Firm, P.A., and James C. Blecke, for appellees.
EMAS, FERNANDEZ and LUCK, JJ.
MOTION FOR REVIEW
Waves of Hialeah, Inc. ("The Waves"), the defendant
and judgment debtor below, seeks review of the trial
court's order denying its "Motion to Set Good and
Sufficient Bond and Other Conditions." We generally
review the trial court's order on a motion for
supersedeas bond under an abuse of discretion standard.
City of Lauderdale Lakes v. Corn, 415 So.2d 1270
(Fla. 1982). However, to the extent that the trial
court's determination rests upon the construction of a
rule or statute, our review is de novo. See,
e.g., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Sikes, 191 So.3d 491
(Fla. 1st DCA 2016). For the reasons that follow, we deny the
motion for review.
Julia Machado and Rafael Guevara, as co-personal
representatives of the Estate of Yaimi Guevara Machado, filed
suit against The Waves. The suit alleged that Yaimi was
murdered while on the premises of The Waves, and that
Yaimi's death was the result of negligent or inadequate
security provided by The Waves.
a trial, the jury awarded damages in the total amount of
twelve million dollars. Final judgment was entered on
December 4, 2017, and the trial court denied The Waves'
The Waves filed a Motion to Set Good and Sufficient Bond and
Other Conditions. In its motion, The Waves recognized that,
pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.310(b)(1),
where the judgment is "solely for the payment of money,
a party may obtain an automatic stay of execution pending
review, without the necessity of a motion or order, by
posting a good and sufficient bond equal to the principal
amount of the judgment plus twice the statutory rate of
interest on the total amount on which the party has an
obligation to pay interest."
this automatic stay provision for money judgments, The Waves
asked the trial court to reduce the amount of the bond
necessary for a stay pending appeal, suggesting that the
posting of one million dollars, together with the setting of
non-monetary conditions,  would constitute a "good and
hearing on the motion, counsel for The Waves argued that the
posting of a twelve million dollar bond (plus two years'
interest at the statutory rate) "[w]ill most likely
bankrupt my client." Also at the hearing, The Waves
conceded that this court has previously construed rule
9.310(b)(1) as the only method by which an ...