Background
Plaintiff Lana Patrick, a self-described journalist and activist, attempted to record video inside the Pasco County Tax Collector’s office in Dade City, Florida. An employee informed her of a policy requiring prior approval for recording to protect confidential citizen information. When Patrick refused to stop recording or leave, police issued a trespass warning. Patrick previously filed a lawsuit against the employee and police officers, which was dismissed with prejudice. She then filed a second lawsuit against the Tax Collector in his official capacity, alleging the policy violated the First Amendment and the Florida Sunshine Law.
The court’s reasoning
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal. First, the court addressed the res judicata claim, finding that both lawsuits arose from the same nucleus of operative facts: the enforcement of the recording policy. Although the Tax Collector was not a defendant in the first suit, the court noted it need not decide if he was in privity with the employee because the complaint failed to state a claim on the merits. Second, regarding the First Amendment claim, the court applied the forum analysis. It concluded the Tax Collector’s office is either a limited public forum or a nonpublic forum. In either setting, the recording policy was constitutional because it was viewpoint neutral and reasonable. The policy served legitimate interests in protecting confidential documents, preventing disruptions, and allowing employees to serve customers efficiently. The court rejected the argument that the policy was an unconstitutional prior restraint.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that government entities may enforce reasonable, viewpoint-neutral recording policies in non-traditional public forums to protect confidential information and maintain order. It also signals that plaintiffs cannot circumvent prior dismissals by suing different officials in their official capacities for the same underlying conduct.