Some Court Updates

Crazy week so far. The CFO announcement has ruffled some feathers. I plan on doing a breakdown of the math and how it works. I planned to do it tomorrow, but may need to do it Monday, depending on how a call goes later today that should provide more details.

For now, I want to provide an update on the lawsuits involving the County. It has been awhile since I have talked about them or provided an update, so let's see where they stand.

2025CA000535A - Right Rudder

The big news here is that we are moving towards a trial in February 2027, unless there is some sort of agreement prior to that date. The court is requiring another mediation before the trial, so anything is possible.

Prior to that, the court dismissed counts II through IV and VI. Right Rudder voluntarily dismissed count V.

That leaves only the breach of contract in regards to the termination of the lease by the county.

In the mean time, depositions are being scheduled. Notably, former county employees Quincy Wylupek, Bruce Register and current employee Todd Regan are scheduled for depositions in April. Wylupek and Register were working in the county during the solicitation for the FBO contract and worked directly with Right Rudder. Regan is the person currently in charge of aviation and is the one that authorized the termination letters to be given to Right Rudder.

There is also the matter of eviction. The county has filed for eviction action. That goes before a judge in a few weeks. Not sure what happens if the judge evicted RR before the Feb 2027 trial... and then they win the trial.

Will keep an eye on it.

2025CA000565A - SWFWMD

This is the lawsuit SWFWMD filed against the county for failing to get Environmental Resource Permits for Inverness Villages IV and the "roads" out there.

There has not been much movement here. Since this is a state agency suing another state entity, mediation is required before the case can move forward. That mediation date will be April 15, 2026.

It does appear that Van der Valk has been working on some sort of settlement of other cases involving them, so it will be interesting to see if that changes anything in this case.

2025CA000756A - Pine Ridge

A couple of big things happened recently here.

1) The judge that was overseeing this case, Pamela Vergara, apparently retired. A new judge has been assigned to this case on February 26th. It will now be overseen by Senior Judge Lawrence J Semento.

2) Promptly after taking over the case, Semento denies the oral argument request by Pine Ridge.

On the surface, that appears to be a bad sign for Pine Ridge. Why would the judge deny an oral argument to hear the case? Seems bad.

However, keep in mind how this process works. This is NOT a new hearing. This is an appeal of the BOCC decision. Pine Ridge has claimed that the approval of the Dix project was wrong.

As such, they provided the courts with documents making their argument on why it was wrong. Pine Ridge and the County responded with their own documents, laying out why they feel it was the correct decision. Pine Ridge then replied to those filings.

I won't speculate on the reason to deny the oral arguments, but it is not a normal process for this sort of thing. The documents provided to the court should include everything the judge needs to know regarding this case. There should be no need for oral arguments to further explain.

One interesting thing to note... From my understanding, Pine Ridge is having a HOA election in April. Depending on who wins those spots, the new board may decide to keep this case active or may decide to drop the case and move on.

Keep an eye out there.

2026CA000075A - Novich v Citrus County Sheriff's Office

This case is regarding alleged issues surrounding public records requests. The claim is that the CCSO did not follow Florida Statutes related to public records requests. At issue are fees charged to Novich for the production of certain records he is requesting. The CCSO claims some records are exempt from disclosure and subject to fees to redact the information, as allowed by law. Novich asks for the non-exempt information without having to pay a fee. CCSO argues that it cannot provide that information because the records requested include both types of information and require someone to redact the exempt information.

On March 12, 2026, the court granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice and has given Novich 20 days to file an amended complaint. In this order, the court states: "Here, the Petitioner failed to allege a valid cause of action. Specifically, Petitioner failed to claim that Respondent improperly reused to produce the records in a timely manner because the Petition evinces multiple instances of timely communication regarding the record.