Verdict in rock-mine lawsuit chills free speech in Florida

Hardly anyone was paying attention to a billionaire developer’s lawsuit against environmentalist Maggy Hurchalla until she lost it. Then a jury awarded him $4.4 million for her attempts to block his plan to dig and sell rocks from a sugar cane field near Lake Okeechobee, store water there and sell it to a city. Be very careful what you say about the public’s business, the verdict seemed to mean, or you could be ruined financially.

Hurchalla, a former Martin County Commissioner who’s the surviving sister of former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, joked that she had nothing to lose but two kayaks and a 14-year-old Toyota. But understanding the stakes, an impressively broad array of public interest groups and individuals rallied to her appeal after the verdict came down earlier this year in favor of George Lindemann Jr.’s Lake Point project.

The case is pending before the Fourth District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach, which agreed Friday to accept three friend-of-the-court briefs representing 12 organizations and four individuals. They include Florida’s most prominent environmentalist, Nathaniel P. Reed, speaking from the grave. He filed his mo- tion before his accidental death last month. The appeals court initially denied it, then changed its mind Friday.

There are now 21 attorneys involved on the two sides. It is a very big deal.

The organizations represented are the Florida Wildlife Federation, Friends of the Everglades, Bullsugar, the Pegasus Foundation, the Guardians of Martin County, The First Amendment Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Foundation of Florida, the Florida Society of News Editors, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Brechner Center for Freedom of Information at the University of Florida.

The other private citizens are Fane Lozeman of Riviera Beach, who has won two First Amendment cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and academic authors Penelope Canan and George W. Pring, who published a book on so-called SLAPP suits. That’s an acronym for Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation, a tactic prohibited in some states, for silencing opposition to projects such as Lake Point’s rock mine.

Lindemann’s has all the attributes of a SLAPP suit. He didn’t accuse Hurchalla of libel, which would have required proof not only that she defamed his character, but that she also was recklessly wrong on the facts. The law favors robust commentary where public figures are involved.

Instead, his tactic was to accuse her of “tortious interference” in the contracts he signed with two public agencies. It seems a lot easier to convince a judge and jury that someone messed with your business, though it shouldn’t be when the public’s business is at stake.

Never mind, for now, that two government agencies responsible for water and the environment folded in the face of this lawsuit and he got what he wanted.

Never mind, for now, whether she was right or wrong about the environmental consequences, or even whether the plan would be good for the Everglades, as Lindemann and his supporters claim.

Never mind, for now, whether the outcome could overturn Florida’s historic doctrine that water belongs to all the people, rather than to a developer who means to collect it in a rock pit and sell it to a city.

The central issue, vastly greater, is whether the lawsuit and the staggering judgment are a frightful warning to citizens who exercise their First Amendment rights to speak out and petition the government about what they think is wrong.

The court’s Friday decision to open its doors to Florida’s environmentalists, good government advocates and defenders of freedom of speech and press signifies the public importance of this verdict.

It is not often that a party to a case opposes friend-of-the-court motions and less often that they are denied. However, Lake Point’s attorney did object. Among other things, he said Hurchalla had enough lawyers without the intervenors.

The unusual objection to would-be friends of the court who clearly have vast interests at stake is consistent with the aggressive history of Lindemann’s suit. Hurchalla couldn’t afford to post an enormous bond while she appealed the verdict. So Lake Point sent the sheriff to seize the only tangible possessions she owned in her name — the kayaks and the old Toyota, and even inquired into the value of her wedding ring. Lindemann’s lawyers also glommed onto bank accounts she shared with her husband and peered into their safety deposit box.

Lindemann doesn’t need the money. The entire population of Florida, nearly 20 million people, can’t afford to let him win it. And they are fortunate that so many people have rallied to Hurchalla’s side.

Editorials are the opinion of the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board and written by one of its members or a designee. The Editorial Board consists of Editorial Page Editor Rosemary O'Hara, Andy Reid and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson.