ORLANDO, Fla. – Attorneys representing the Walt Disney Company have accused the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, or CFTOD, of withholding records and information as part of a lawsuit filed against the company by the special taxing district.
“It’s enough to really get you to ask, ‘What is it they’re trying to hide here?’” Disney attorney Stephen Brody said during a court hearing Tuesday.
Recommended Videos
CFTOD’s attorney claims much of the information requested by Disney is irrelevant to the lawsuit, including some the district said is too burdensome to compile.
CFTOD sued Disney last year seeking to invalidate a series of last-minute agreements the company made with the outgoing board of the district, which was formerly known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
Those agreements took regulatory power away from the incoming board, which was appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis after the governor and the state legislature dissolved the old district as part of a feud with Disney for its criticism of the Parental Rights in Education Act.
Disney later countersued CFTOD, accusing the new board of breaching the contracts signed by the former, Disney-friendly board.
[STORY CONTINUES BELOW]
During a court hearing Tuesday, Disney asked Orange County Circuit Court Judge Margaret Schreiber to compel CFTOD to turn over certain records as part of the discovery process and respond to written questions submitted by Disney, which are known as interrogatories.
The requested records include communications about the agreements that may have been written or received on CFTOD representatives’ personal electronic devices.
“The district appears to have made no effort to search for, collect or review documents from personal email accounts or mobile devices of district board members and employees,” said Brody.
Disney filed a separate lawsuit against CFTOD last month alleging violations of Florida’s public record laws. CFTOD has not yet responded to that lawsuit. The first hearing in the case is scheduled for Thursday.
An attorney representing CFTOD acknowledged that the district is still working to produce some of the discovery materials requested by Disney’s lawyers but insisted that it is fulfilling its obligations.
“One of the things that has been a little frustrating is that Disney essentially is complaining that they don’t think that we produced enough documents,” said CFTOD attorney Paul Huck. “We’ve reviewed over 289,000 documents in response to this, including tens of thousands of documents that were reviewed from senior members of staff at the district.”
In addition to discovery materials, Disney is asking the judge to require CFTOD to answer written questions related to how the new board and district administrator were selected.
“It’s a basic inquiry in a case where one of the central issues is whether actions have been directed by or coordinated with the governor’s office to harm Disney,” said Brody.
CFTOD argued that the topic is unrelated to the district’s lawsuit involving the last-minute agreements Disney made with the outgoing district board.
“How and why the board and the district administrator were appointed or hired is irrelevant to whether those actions are lawful,” said Huck. “That’s not what this case is about, and that’s not what Disney’s counterclaim is about.”
Schreiber said she would rule on Disney’s request at a later date.
Meanwhile, last month a judge heard arguments in Disney’s federal lawsuit against Gov. DeSantis over the law that dissolved the Reedy Creek Improvement District as a violation of the company’s First Amendment rights. The judge has yet to rule on that case.
Get today’s headlines in minutes with Your Florida Daily: