159 So. 3d 882
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2015Background
- Consumer Rights, LLC emailed UCBOCC@windstream.net on Oct 30, 2013 requesting an electronic list of all Union County employee work email addresses, sending from ask4records@gmail.com on behalf of an unidentified "Florida company."
- The request contained no personal contact information or identification of the requester or agent.
- County personnel delayed responding because the email appeared suspicious (possible phishing) and was sent to a general account not clearly tied to a records custodian.
- Four months after sending the request, Consumer Rights filed suit seeking injunctive relief, mandamus, and attorney fees under §119.12, Fla. Stat.; the county provided the records after litigation commenced.
- At an evidentiary hearing the trial court found the county acted in good faith, the delay was not an unlawful refusal, and denied attorney fees; the First DCA affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the county's delay amounted to an "unlawful refusal" under §119.12 entitling plaintiff to attorney fees | Delay until after suit was filed was effectively a refusal and warrants fees | Delay was justified by bona fide concerns (suspicious/generic email, potential phishing) and not unlawful | Delay justified; not an unlawful refusal; no fee award |
| Whether a public-records request may be made by email and require electronic production | Emails are a valid medium; records must be provided electronically if maintained that way | Agreed emails are valid, but a generic/unverifiable email may not be treated as a person/custodian | Email requests are valid generally, but a generic address not linked to a person need not be treated as a proper request until verified |
| Whether the county violated the duty to respond in good faith under §119.07(1)(c) | County failed to promptly acknowledge and respond in good faith | County acted in good faith given phishing risk and lack of contact info | Court found county acted in good faith; no bad faith shown |
| Whether the request was made to the proper custodian/designee | Request to UCBOCC email sufficed as a records request | Request was not sent to the clerk/custodian or an authorized designee | Concurring opinion: independent ground—request was not to proper custodian; no obligation to respond |
Key Cases Cited
- Wootton v. Cook, 590 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (agencies must provide computerized records in the format they are regularly maintained)
- Promenade D’Iberville, LLC v. Sundy, 145 So.3d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (delay without good reason may support fee awards under public-records law)
- Barfield v. Town of Eatonville, 675 So.2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (recognizing delay can amount to refusal under public-records statute)
- Weeks v. Golden, 764 So.2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (same: unwarranted delay can justify relief/fees)
- Office of the State Attorney for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit v. Gonzalez, 953 So.2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (fees available only if delay is unjustifiable and thus an unlawful refusal)
- Consumer Rights, LLC v. Bradford County, 153 So.3d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (delay until after suit may still require fact-specific hearing to determine reasonableness)
- Grapski v. City of Alachua, 31 So.3d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (records provided after need had passed can negate entitlement to fees)