David Bear v. Douglas Underhill

── David Bear v. Douglas Underhill ── Case No.: 24-12285 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: April 01, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-12285 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 1 of 18 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-12285 ____________________ DAVID BEAR, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ESCAMBIA COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Defendant, DOUGLAS B. UNDERHILL, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 3:19-cv-04424-MCR-HTC ____________________ Before ROSENBAUM, GRANT, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 24-12285 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 2 of 18 2 Opinion of the Court 24-12285 David Bear and Douglas Underhill are longtime adversaries in local politics in Escambia County in Northwestern Florida. Douglas Underhill, a former county commissioner in Escambia County, appeals the district court’s ruling that he unlawfully with- held public records in response to requests David Bear filed. After careful consideration and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm the decision of the district court ordering Underhill to pay attorneys’ fees to David Bear as a sanction for unlawfully withhold- ing public records. I. BACKGROUND Bear is the CEO of a wholesale alcohol distributor covering Northwestern Florida, including Escambia County on the Alabama border. He and members of his family are deeply involved in local politics. For instance, they serve on such boards as the Pensacola- Escambia Development Council (“PEDC”) and Tourist Develop- ment Commission. For his part, Underhill was a member of the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners (“the Board”) for eight years, ending in 2022. He sat alongside Bear on the PEDC and Tourist Development Commission. Underhill also often took po- litical positions contrary to those of Bear and his family. During most of the time relevant to this case, Escambia County had policies restricting commissioners’ use of social media. From 2009 to May 16, 2019, a policy prohibited commissioners from “discussing county business” on social media sites. USCA11 Case: 24-12285 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 3 of 18 24-12285 Opinion of the Court 3 Still, the policy allowed a commissioner to post an article or comment on social media under his actual name so long as no other commissioner had also posted a comment or response. When commissioners made those sorts of posts, the policy re- quired the county to retain a copy. Starting in 2012, another policy “prohibited County employees, including commissioners, from conducting County business on personal social media accounts but allowed an official page to be established by approval of the County administrator.” Despite these policies, while Underhill was serving as a county commissioner, he used his personally owned Facebook ac- count to interact with constituents and provide them with infor- mation on matters involving the Board and county business.