The court never ruled one way or the other on the substantive question of whether FPRA was violated by Broward's lie.
It suggests—in dicta—that it probably wasn't[1] but ultimately declines to definitively rule on the the issue[2].
[1] "The Court therefore has difficulty in concluding that Broward’s actions could be unlawful under the FPRA."
[2] "At any rate, assuming without finding that Broward did not comply with the FPRA when denying the existence of the requested footage, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s FPRA
claim ... is now moot". (Emphasis added)
It suggests—in dicta—that it probably wasn't[1] but ultimately declines to definitively rule on the the issue[2].
[1] "The Court therefore has difficulty in concluding that Broward’s actions could be unlawful under the FPRA."
[2] "At any rate, assuming without finding that Broward did not comply with the FPRA when denying the existence of the requested footage, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s FPRA claim ... is now moot". (Emphasis added)