DeSantis' Central Florida Tourism Oversight District lawsuit against Disney to go before judge today

Forum Forums Tweet Share Tweet Share

Posted: Friday July 14, 2023 1:09pm ET by WDWMAGIC Staff

A judge will hear arguments today from the legal teams of Disney and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.

The CFTOD board unanimously passed a motion on May 1 2023, to sue the Walt Disney Company in a Florida state court. This is in contrast to Disney's lawsuit against DeSantis and the board, which was filed in a federal court.

In announcing the lawsuit, Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board chair Martin Garcia said, "Since Disney sued us, we have no choice now but to respond. This district will seek justice in state court here in Central Florida, where both it and Disney reside and do business. Yes, we'll seek justice in our own backyard."

Garcia says the state court lawsuit will seek to "uphold and enforce the board's April 26, 2023 legislative findings relating to the February 8, 2023 development agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants."

The Walt Disney Company filed a motion on May 16 to dismiss or stay the state lawsuit brought about by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.

Disney says CFTOD lawsuit must wait until Disney's federal case against Governor DeSantis is resolved

Disney argues that recent actions taken by the state have rendered the litigation irrelevant. Disney also says that Florida law mandates the state court to put the lawsuit on hold until the company's federal case against Governor Ron DeSantis is resolved.

In the motion filed in Florida state court, Disney's lawyers argue that the federal action Disney filed against DeSantis last month involves similar parties and overlapping issues, and the federal case should be the primary court for resolving the dispute.

Disney's federal April 26, 2023 lawsuit was filed in response to Governor DeSantis' attempts to replace the Reedy Creek Improvement District with his own hand-picked board. Disney's lawsuit says that DeSantis' actions violated its First Amendment and other constitutional rights, alleging they were motivated by retaliation due to the company's opposition to the so-called "don't say gay" law related to parental rights in schools.

Discuss on the Forums

Get Walt Disney World News Delivered to Your Inbox

peter114358 days ago

No. But it’s the start of the process

MR.Dis8 days ago

Does this mean a new agreement has been reached with Disney? I am trying to read between the lines on just what this is saying.

flyakite8 days ago

castlecake2.021 days ago

Yes

Stripes21 days ago

Has Disney/CFTOD continued to replace the purple direction signage with the new blue color scheme since CFTOD took over?

mkt21 days ago

You're right. The new document will be different. It will be "different" in the way that Chris Gaines was "different" from Garth Brooks or how the drummer from Nirvana is "different" from the singer of the Foo Fighters.

Unbanshee21 days ago

Both are effectively picked by the Governor, just not technically. Look no further than the communications "strategy" with the replacement of Gilzean of the Governor's office getting out ahead of every single step of the process

lazyboy97o21 days ago

The settlement acknowledged the “need” to change the comprehensive plan, which undermines this idea. So too does the lack of an agreement, as the 2032 Comprehensive Plan wasn’t that different than the again in force 2020 Comprehensive Plan.

Brian21 days ago

That's understandable for sure. I just felt inclined to make the distinction due to the ongoing conversation, as the district administrator is selected by the board, while the board is selected by the governor.

mkt21 days ago

The new agreement will be functionally the same as the one Disney was sued over.

pdude8121 days ago

You're right. This has been going on so long I just lumped all the antagonists together.

Brian21 days ago

Not to nitpick, but Gilzean was district administrator, not a board member.

pdude8121 days ago

A bigger risk than keeping Garcia and Gilzean on the board as active disruptors? I don't agree with their decision to stall the federal lawsuit, but I understand why they saw the status quo as a risk to growth over the next few years.