1/ In Florida, a state-court judge orally extended (or said she was going to extend) the final certification deadlines for the Gov, Ag Comm'r, & a state house race, but the Sec'y of State filed a notice of removal 2 hours before she issued a written order miamiherald.com/news/politics-…
2/ Federal law provides that, when a case is removed, all injunctions that had been entered in state court "remain in full force and effect" unless the federal district court decides to modify or dissolve them. 28 U.S.C. 1450.
3/ So the issue is whether the state court actually entered an injunction. Even if the judge tried to enter an oral injunction during the telephonic hearing, Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.610(a)(2) appears to imply all injunctions, including temporary, must be in writing
4/ Once the notice of removal is filed w/ federal court & copy filed w/ state court, the state court "shall proceed no further" unless the case is remanded. 28 U.S.C. 1446(d). It appears the state court's written injunction issued after the notice of removal was filed is invalid.
5/ The federal judge, of course, is free to decide to grant a TRO and/or preliminary injunction - and he may choose to defer to the state court's expressed intentions - but it appears, at least as a formal legal matter, the deadlines remain in effect.
6/ Of course, this is a rapidly evolving situation and further info might develop about exactly when the notices were filed with the federal & state courts. But as of now, it looks like there are strong arguments the state court's attempt to suspend the deadline was ineffectual.
7/ Either way, civil procedure professors, I think you have your final exam essay question all teed up for you!
8/ If, despite Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.610, Florida courts recognize/enforce oral injunctions in response to emergency motions, then the issue is whether the court said it was issuing such an order immediately, or instead that it would be drafting one, & whether that makes a difference
