Printable card from truthoverchaos.com/map/start/#N-099. Back to the start page.

University of Florida · May 7, 2026Card N-099
D.E.V.I.L. misalignment analysis: Deviation · Expected output · Verified facts and law · Independent encounter · Law
D
Deviation

Three days after "This completes the public records request," UF's associate counsel had IT pull every result for two of Husband's case numbers, both judges and "surveillance video" into a separate 88-page file, routed "for approval to be released." As of Sept. 29, 2026, UF has never released it to him or said which of its pages it produced on May 4.

E
Expected output

Section 119.07(1)(a) required UF to give Husband the file its own lawyer built from his request, or to name in writing, under s. 119.07(1)(e), the statute for any page it keeps. UF's counsel listed the file among "the files forwarded to the public records office as part of fulfilling this request." The next step was delivery to Husband.

V
Verified facts and law
  • May 7, 2026, 9:16 AM to 10:28 AM: Associate Counsel Amy B. Quillen to IT: "can you pull out the results with the search terms 13th Circuit, 2025-CA-002469, 25-CA-10255, Judge Kelly Ayers, Judge Matthew Felix, and surveillance video? If yes, please provide those results as a separate pdf." Legal assistant Barbara L. Wood logged "additional potentially responsive records (88 PAGES)," copied "to be reviewed by the General Counsel and for approval to be released." N-099
    Read them: UF's own emails, May 7, 2026 (production pp. 267-268) (link pending redacted copy)
  • May 8, 2026: UF wrote that it "did locate public records that contain the search term 'Hanson,' which relate to individuals who are not you," and asked whether he sought them. Husband answered that day: no, and demanded "Internal University communications ... referencing the case numbers, individuals, or keywords I identified" with a privilege log. UF's message never mentioned the day-old file. N-100, NEW-0826-3, N-099
  • Sept. 2 to Sept. 29, 2026: 118 days after the file was built, Judge Keim ordered every record UF located delivered for in camera review. UF's counsel sent the file to the judge, "intended for an in camera review only," without copying Husband. On Sept. 3 he answered Husband's request for those materials: "I will have that request processed through the portal and provided to you once any exempt or confidential information is redacted." No production to Husband has carried the file, and no exemption statement with a citation has reached him. NEW-0906-U5, NEW-0906-U6, N-099, NEW-0826-3
    Which production delivered the 88-page file to Husband, and what statutory exemption does UF claim for any page it kept?
    Read them: UF counsel's emails, Sept. 2 to 3, 2026 (pp. 1, 5-8) (link pending redacted copy)
I
Independent encounter

Amy B. Quillen, Associate Counsel (ordered the separate pdf). Barbara L. Wood, legal assistant (routed it for release approval). James W. Kirkconnell, Assistant Counsel (sent it to the judge; promised it through the portal). One request, one file, one demand. Every duty here arises from UF's own May 7, 2026 extraction on this request alone; no other card is needed to establish it.

L
Law: the authority that creates the duty

Art. I, s. 24(a), Fla. Const. presumes public records open and puts the burden of any exemption on the custodian. Section 119.07(1)(a), Fla. Stat., requires the custodian to permit inspection of the non-exempt records its search located, and s. 119.07(1)(e) requires the statutory basis for any exemption claimed.

Cite this card: Truth Over Chaos Node Map, Card N-099, University of Florida, Three days after "This completes the public records request," UF's associate counsel had IT, checked through October 8, 2026, truthoverchaos.com/map/start/#N-099
The details are where it lives: full record, receipts, related cards
What happened

On May 7, 2026, three days after UF declared Husband's request complete, Associate Counsel Amy Quillen asked UF Information Technology to pull results for the case numbers, the judges' names, and surveillance video, and to "provide those results as a separate pdf." IT delivered the same morning: sixteen messages, eighty-eight pages. Within the hour, UF's legal assistant recorded in writing: "I have copied the records to Amy Q's PRR U: Drive to be reviewed by the General Counsel and for approval to be released." The release never happened.

The next day Husband demanded those records and a privilege log. UF produced neither, and no UF filing through its August 10, 2026 case management statement mentions the file; UF's August 31, 2026 hearing exhibit list includes the two May 7 emails from its legal assistant that name it (Exhibits Z and EE). UF produced the correspondence that created, named, transmitted, and filed the extraction, but not the extraction. [IGNORED]

The baseline

The records law gives a custodian two lawful moves with a located record: produce it, or withhold it under a stated exemption with the required written statement. UF's counsel created a file of exactly the disputed material and made neither move. The next day UF told Husband that what it had not produced was records of other people named Hanson (N-100). One sentence saying where the 88 pages went would settle it. It has never been written.

The mechanism

three days after declaring the records request complete, UF's own lawyer asked for the disputed records "as a separate pdf"; UF's staff routed the 88-page file "for approval to be released"; it was never released or logged, and no UF filing mentioned it until UF's August 31, 2026 exhibit list included the emails that name it

Receipts

- UF email production emails_1.pdf pp. 267-268: the Quillen 9:16 AM request (p.268), the Quiros 10:11 AM delivery, and the Wood 10:28 AM routing email (p.267), naming the file ISS-444193-W018463-032626-16-88-opt-SpecificKeywords.pdf and flagging a possible invoice "based on the number of pages"
- Full Quillen request: "can you pull out the results with the search terms 13th Circuit, 2025-CA-002469, 25-CA-10255, Judge Kelly Ayers, Judge Matthew Felix, and surveillance video? If yes, please provide those results as a separate pdf."
- keyword chart same page (Hanson 113 messages, 98.26%)
- p. 190; Exhibit D to Doc 006 searched in full (479 pages, text layer plus eye for the 27 pages without one)
- the never-released scope statement checked against UF's four filings, each read in full: not the protective-order motion, not its exhibits, not the response to the order to show cause, not the 8/10/26 case management statement
- UF's 8/31/26 Exhibit List (Filing 256089009) lists the 5/7 Wood emails that name the file as Exhibits Z and EE (PDF pp. 2, 156-158, 181-182)