Appeals Court Affirms Conviction of Everglades Scientist Accused of Stealing ‘Trade Secrets’

ORLANDO, Fla.—A state appeals court has affirmed the conviction of a renowned Everglades scientist, whose work has helped steer one of the most ambitious attempts at ecological restoration in human history, in a bitter legal battle with his former employer.

Tom Van Lent faces a 10-day jail sentence after he was found guilty in 2023 of indirect criminal contempt. He is accused of stealing “trade secrets” and destroying files when he left the politically powerful Everglades Foundation in February 2022, allegations he denies.

“We emphasize that neither Van Lent nor any party is above the law,” wrote Judge Monica Gordo in the Oct. 30 opinion from the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami. “So long as a court’s criminal contempt findings are supported by competent substantial evidence and a defendant is afforded full due process, as was done here, a contempt judgment shall be afforded its presumption of correctness.”

Van Lent referred inquiries to his attorney, Michael Rayboun, who said the scientist was saddened and disappointed and considering legal options. Van Lent also faces a $177,000 judgment related to his conviction, for the foundation’s attorney fees.

“He remains, however—and without question—committed to working for the greater good of his favorite place in the world, the Everglades,” Rayboun said in a statement.

Van Lent spent 17 years at the foundation, once serving as chief scientist, although he was not in that position at the time of his departure. His entanglement with the foundation coincided with a controversial plan for a reservoir described by Gov. Ron DeSantis, then a GOP presidential candidate, as “the crown jewel of Everglades restoration.”

The 16-square-mile reservoir would be the largest of its kind the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has ever built nationwide. The reservoir is aimed at reviving the river of grass’s historic flow south from Lake Okeechobee, the state’s largest lake. Construction began in February 2023.  

Van Lent joined with other advocacy groups in raising concerns about the reservoir’s design, putting him at odds with the foundation, which supported the reservoir. The organization has said the litigation has nothing to do with the reservoir, and that the only motivation behind the legal action is to recover materials it contends Van Lent downloaded and destroyed.

“As stated by the trial court and confirmed by the Third District Court of Appeal, Dr. Van Lent intentionally violated a court injunction barring him from deleting information when he destroyed more than 760,000 files from his devices and downloaded anti-forensic software to hide his activities,” the foundation said in a statement. “The Everglades Foundation, Inc. vs. Thomas Van Lent was strictly an employment issue related to Dr. Van Lent’s destruction of hundreds of thousands of Foundation documents when he left the organization in 2022.”

The $21 billion federal and state effort to restore the Everglades involves a series of landscape-scale projects, each massive on its own, including the reservoir. DeSantis has made Everglades restoration a priority of his administration, putting millions of dollars toward the effort. The watershed, which is responsible for the drinking water of some 12 million Floridians, begins in central Florida with the headwaters of the Kissimmee River and includes Lake Okeechobee, sawgrass marshes to the south and Florida Bay, at the peninsula’s southernmost tip.

Van Lent has denied stealing or destroying files. He testified in December 2023, during his sentencing hearing, that the only documents he deleted held personal information like income tax return records. He said he did not know the private materials were part of the dispute with the foundation.

The foundation says the “trade secrets” he is accused of stealing consist of memos and reports, white papers and confidential presentations related to the spectrum of issues the scientist worked on while at the organization. The foundation suggests Van Lent compromised the materials potentially to enrich himself or for the benefit of Friends of the Everglades, a nonprofit environmental organization where he now is a paid contractor.

The foundation reported paying more than $722,000 in legal fees to the TYZ Law Group, Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton and CMA Strategic Advisors in a 2023 tax filing.  

“This case was not about a reservoir, a tweet or even the Everglades. This case was an employment dispute where the trial court found that Dr. Van Lent deleted and destroyed his former employer’s data,” said Jorge Piedra, managing partner of Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton, in a statement. “The appeal was about the rule of law and a Court’s authority to enforce its own order that was intentionally violated by Dr. Van Lent. Both Courts agreed that Dr. Van Lent intentionally violated a court order.”

The litigation has shocked the otherwise tight-knit Everglades advocacy community. Some have raised concerns that the legal action distracts from the larger mission of restoration and could have a chilling effect on the science involved in the effort, which is publicly funded. Friends of the Everglades has said Van Lent never shared confidential information with that organization.

“We continue to stand with Dr. Tom Van Lent, one of the world’s most trusted and knowledgeable Everglades scientists as he defends himself against an aggressive and counterproductive legal attack waged by his former employer, the Everglades Foundation,” Friends of the Everglades said in a statement. “Friends of the Everglades has steadfastly maintained that Dr. Van Lent never shared any ‘trade secrets,’ as alleged by the Foundation, and we remain baffled by this legal pursuit. Regardless of these scorched-earth litigation tactics, Dr. Van Lent will remain a major voice in Everglades restoration.”

While the Everglades Foundation and Friends of the Everglades share many restoration goals, the organizations have differed on the design of the reservoir. Friends of the Everglades and other groups have raised concerns about whether the reservoir would convey enough water south or clean the water to established standards. The groups also said the design failed to factor in climate change, among other issues.