Disney Wants to Narrow Scope of Lawsuit Against DeSantis
The fight between Gov. Ron DeSantis and Disney began last year after the company publicly opposed a state law banning classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades, a policy critics call "Don't Say Gay."
September 05, 2023 at 02:17 PM
3 minute read
Cases and CourtsDisney wants to narrow the scope of its federal lawsuit against Gov. Ron DeSantis to just a free speech claim that the Florida governor retaliated against the company because of its public opposition to a state law banning classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades.
Disney on Friday asked a federal judge for permission to file an amended complaint focusing just on the First Amendment claim and leaving to another, state-court lawsuit questions about the legality of agreements the company signed with Disney World's governing district, then-made up of Disney supporters. The agreements were signed before DeSantis and the GOP-controlled Florida Legislature took over the governmental body in the spring.
The agreements shifted control of design and construction at the theme park resort from the new DeSantis appointees on the board of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD) to Disney. The DeSantis appointees are now challenging the legality of the agreements in state court. DeSantis isn't a party in the state court lawsuit.
"Disney faces concrete, imminent, and ongoing injury as a result of CFTOD's new powers and composition, which are being used to punish Disney for expressing a political view," said Disney's federal court motion.
The revised complaint would challenge "this unconstitutional weaponization of government by seeking a declaratory judgment that will allow Disney to pursue its future in Florida free from the ongoing retaliatory actions of the CFTOD Board," Disney said.
U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor on Friday rejected Disney's motion to narrow the scope because of a procedural rule requiring Disney attorneys to confer with DeSantis' attorneys before filing such a request. The judge said Disney could refile its request after complying with the court rule. An email seeking comment was sent to Disney attorneys on Sunday.
The Disney request, as well as other recent motions filed in the state case, demonstrate how the fates of the two lawsuits have become intertwined, especially after Disney filed a counter-claim in the state case asserting many of the same claims made in the federal case. Disney filed the counterclaim after the state court judge refused Disney's request to dismiss the lawsuit.
The fight between DeSantis and Disney began last year after the company, facing significant pressure internally and externally, publicly opposed a state law banning classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades, a policy critics call "Don't Say Gay."
As punishment, DeSantis took over the district through legislation passed by Florida lawmakers and appointed a new board of supervisors to oversee municipal services for the sprawling theme parks and hotels. But the new supervisors' authority was limited by the company's agreements with predecessors.
In response, DeSantis and Florida lawmakers passed legislation that repealed those agreements.
Mike Schneider reports for the Associated Press.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Why Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
- 2The Whys and Hows of a Mediator’s Proposal
- 3Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 4Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 5'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250