Case Name: AGROSOURCE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CITRUS, a Florida state agency, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2014-10-01
Citations: 148 So. 3d 138
Docket Number: No. 2D13-4624
Parties: AGROSOURCE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CITRUS, a Florida state agency, Appellee.
Judges: MORRIS, J., Concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 148
Pages: 138–142

Head Matter:
AGROSOURCE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CITRUS, a Florida state agency, Appellee.
No. 2D13-4624.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Oct. 1, 2014.
Lewis J. Conwell and J. Trumon Phillips of DLA Piper LLP (US), Tampa, for Appellant.
Monterey Campbell, Mark N. Miller, Kristie Hatcher-Bolin, and William Roberts of GrayRobinson, P.A. Lakeland; and Mayanne Downs of GrayRobinson, P.A. Orlando, for Appellee.

Opinion:
BLACK, Judge.
AgroSource, Inc., appeals the order denying access to twenty-two emails that were the subject of a public records request, asserting that the trial court did not conduct a proper inspection of these documents. We affirm because the trial court's determination that the responsive emails were exempt from disclosure is supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Bryan v. Butterworth, 692 So.2d 878, 881 (Fla.1997) (holding that where "the record shows that competent substantial evidence supports the trial court's findings" that the documents were exempt from disclosure, said findings will not be "second guess[ed]"). The trial court considered the testimony of the authoring attorney and performed an in camera inspection of the documents, and there is no indication from the record that the trial court abused its discretion in concluding that the responsive emails were exempt from disclosure. See id.
MORRIS, J., Concurs.
ALTENBERND, J., Concurs in part and dissents in part with opinion.
. The first email predated the time frame of AgroSource's request, and the trial court found that email to be nonresponsive to the request.