ORLANDO, Fla. (CN) — Attorneys for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts urged a Florida judge on Friday to throw out a lawsuit filed by a state-backed oversight board seeking to invalidate an agreement that gave Disney control of the special district where its theme park is located.
In a hearing before Orange County Circuit Court Judge Margaret Schreiber, Disney attorney Daniel Petrocelli pointed to a new state law that voids any previous contracts approved by the theme park and the former Reedy Creek Development District, now renamed the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.
“The intervening statute has mooted this case in its entirety,” said Petrocelli of O’Melveny’s Trial Practice. “There is no actual controversy remaining in this case.”
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District filed the lawsuit in May claiming a developmental agreement passed by the Reedy Creek Development District did not follow proper public notice procedures. Later that month, the Florida Legislature passed SB 1604, a land-use regulation bill that included an amendment that specifically targets the agreement made between Disney and the outgoing board.
The parties’ arguments during Friday’s hearing mostly centered on the language of SB 1604 and when the statute applies — from the February agreement made by the former district board or any new deals made after the law passed.
Attorneys for the oversight district argue the law only refers to development agreements made after the statute passed, so the judge still must determine if the earlier agreement has validity.
“It is premature to decide the contract issue at this point in the case,” argued Alan Lawson, a former Florida Supreme Court justice hired by the oversight district.
The hearing on Friday is the latest in the tit-for-tat battle between DeSantis, his appointed oversight board and Disney.
After Disney heavily criticized the Parental Rights in Education law, which bans the teaching of sexual orientation and gender identity topics from kindergarten through third grade and vowed to end any political contributions to state lawmakers, DeSantis branded the corporation as “woke” and removed its self-governing status that was in place for more than 50 years.
In February, DeSantis and the Florida Legislature renamed the district and the governor handpicked a new board of supervisors.
But before the previous board members left, they passed an agreement with Disney that allowed the company to control the district, effectively neutering the governor’s new board.
Clearly incensed, DeSantis announced a series of proposals to wrest control of the district from Disney, including placing tolls on roads within the district in addition to new taxes and state inspections of the theme park’s monorail.
At one point, noting the state has several miles of undeveloped land adjacent to the theme park, the governor bounced around the idea of building a prison abutting the district.
That’s when Disney brought a federal lawsuit, accusing DeSantis and the board members of “targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech.”
Days later, the oversight district filed the circuit civil lawsuit.
During Friday’s hearing, Petrocelli, Disney’s attorney, said the federal lawsuit precedes the state-level lawsuit and if the judge does not dismiss the case, she should at least stay the proceedings.
But Lawson said the oversight district's lawsuit only involves issues related to state law.
“The federal lawsuit involves intentions, communications and actions by the governor and board members,” Lawson told the judge. “These facts are completely irrelevant on the legal issues in this lawsuit.”
But Petrocelli pointed to the plaintiff’s own court filings, in which the district has claimed that if the state judge determines the agreements with the former Reedy Creek Development District are void, the ruling would knock out almost all of Disney’s federal case.
“This is a contradictory, schizophrenic position,” Petrocelli said.
Follow @alexbpickett
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
