×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Private Corporations Subject to Florida's Public Records Act
Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeals has reversed a Broward County
Circuit Court's order dismissing a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking
to compel Aramark Food Service to provide a copy of the food service
contract between Aramark and the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC).
The petition was filed by prisoner Thomas P. Wells, Jr. under Florida's
Public Records Act.
The Circuit Court dismissed the petition on grounds mandamus does not lie
against a private corporation doing business with the State.
In reversing and remanding, the Fourth Circuit held that to determine
whether a private corporation is an agency" subject to Florida's Public
Records Act, a court must consider the following factors: (1) the level of
public funding; (2) commingling of funds; (3) whether the activity was
conducted on publicly owned property; (4) whether services contracted for
are an integral part of the public agency's chosen decision-making process;
(5) whether the private entity is performing a governmental function or a
function which the public agency otherwise would perform; (6) the extent of
the public agency's involvement with, regulation of, or control over the
private entity; (7) whether the private entity was created by the public
agency; (8) whether the public agency has a substantial financial interest
in a private entity; and (9) for who's benefit the private entity is a
functioning.
Due to the variety of circumstances that can be presented, this list is
not all-inclusive. As it does not appear at the Circuit Court undertook
the required analysis to determine if Aramark is an agency subject to
Florida Is Public Records Act, the matter was remanded for further
proceedings. See: Wells. v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So.2d
134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
Circuit Court's order dismissing a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking
to compel Aramark Food Service to provide a copy of the food service
contract between Aramark and the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC).
The petition was filed by prisoner Thomas P. Wells, Jr. under Florida's
Public Records Act.
The Circuit Court dismissed the petition on grounds mandamus does not lie
against a private corporation doing business with the State.
In reversing and remanding, the Fourth Circuit held that to determine
whether a private corporation is an agency" subject to Florida's Public
Records Act, a court must consider the following factors: (1) the level of
public funding; (2) commingling of funds; (3) whether the activity was
conducted on publicly owned property; (4) whether services contracted for
are an integral part of the public agency's chosen decision-making process;
(5) whether the private entity is performing a governmental function or a
function which the public agency otherwise would perform; (6) the extent of
the public agency's involvement with, regulation of, or control over the
private entity; (7) whether the private entity was created by the public
agency; (8) whether the public agency has a substantial financial interest
in a private entity; and (9) for who's benefit the private entity is a
functioning.
Due to the variety of circumstances that can be presented, this list is
not all-inclusive. As it does not appear at the Circuit Court undertook
the required analysis to determine if Aramark is an agency subject to
Florida Is Public Records Act, the matter was remanded for further
proceedings. See: Wells. v. Aramark Food Service Corporation, 888 So.2d
134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Wells. v. Aramark Food Service Corporation
| Year | 2004 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 888 So.2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) |
| Level | State Court of Appeals |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |
THOMAS PERRY WELLS, JR., Appellant, v. ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE CORPORATION, Appellee.
CASE NO. 4D04-457
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT
888 So. 2d 134; 2004 Fla. App. ; 29 Fla. L. Weekly D 2649
November 24, 2004, Opinion Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Victor Tobin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 03-4106 02.
DISPOSITION: Reversed and remanded.
COUNSEL: Thomas Perry Wells, Jr., Indiantown, Pro se.
No appearance for appellee.
JUDGES: WARNER, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.
OPINION: [*134] PER CURIAM.
The petitioner appeals a trial court order that denied his petition for writ of mandamus. He petitioned the court to order Aramark Food Service Corporation to provide a copy of the food service contract between it and the Florida Department of Corrections, pursuant to the Florida Public Records Act. The trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie against a private corporation doing business with the State. We reverse and remand.
In News & Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 1991), the Supreme Court of Florida identified the factors to be considered in determining whether a private corporation is an "agency" subject to Florida's Public Records [*135] Act. The factors include, but are not limited to:
1) the level of public funding;
2) commingling [**2] of funds;
3) whether the activity was conducted on publicly owned property;
4) whether services contracted for are an integral part of the public agency's chosen decision-making process;
5) whether the private entity is performing a governmental function or a function which the public agency otherwise would perform;
6) the extent of the public agency's involvement with, regulation of, or control over the private entity;
7) whether the private entity was created by the public agency;
8) whether the public agency has a substantial financial interest in the private entity; and
9) for who's [sic] benefit the private entity is functioning.
Id. at 1031. The court made clear that this list is not "all-inclusive," due to the variety of circumstances that can be presented. Id.
From the record presented here, it does not appear the trial court undertook the required analysis to determine whether Aramark Food Service is an "agency" as used in Florida's Public Records Act, which would subject it to compliance with the statute. We therefore reverse and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
WARNER, [**3] SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.
CASE NO. 4D04-457
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT
888 So. 2d 134; 2004 Fla. App. ; 29 Fla. L. Weekly D 2649
November 24, 2004, Opinion Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Victor Tobin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 03-4106 02.
DISPOSITION: Reversed and remanded.
COUNSEL: Thomas Perry Wells, Jr., Indiantown, Pro se.
No appearance for appellee.
JUDGES: WARNER, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.
OPINION: [*134] PER CURIAM.
The petitioner appeals a trial court order that denied his petition for writ of mandamus. He petitioned the court to order Aramark Food Service Corporation to provide a copy of the food service contract between it and the Florida Department of Corrections, pursuant to the Florida Public Records Act. The trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie against a private corporation doing business with the State. We reverse and remand.
In News & Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 1991), the Supreme Court of Florida identified the factors to be considered in determining whether a private corporation is an "agency" subject to Florida's Public Records [*135] Act. The factors include, but are not limited to:
1) the level of public funding;
2) commingling [**2] of funds;
3) whether the activity was conducted on publicly owned property;
4) whether services contracted for are an integral part of the public agency's chosen decision-making process;
5) whether the private entity is performing a governmental function or a function which the public agency otherwise would perform;
6) the extent of the public agency's involvement with, regulation of, or control over the private entity;
7) whether the private entity was created by the public agency;
8) whether the public agency has a substantial financial interest in the private entity; and
9) for who's [sic] benefit the private entity is functioning.
Id. at 1031. The court made clear that this list is not "all-inclusive," due to the variety of circumstances that can be presented. Id.
From the record presented here, it does not appear the trial court undertook the required analysis to determine whether Aramark Food Service is an "agency" as used in Florida's Public Records Act, which would subject it to compliance with the statute. We therefore reverse and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
WARNER, [**3] SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.