Rick Scott, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Florida v. David P. Trotti, an individual, 283 So.3d 340

Fourth Judicial Circuit Judge Robert M. Foster tendered a resignation effective December 31, 2018, one week before his term expired on January 7, 2019; Governor Scott accepted the resignation before the judicial qualifying period began.
The statutory qualifying period for circuit judges began April 30, 2018; Trotti submitted qualifying paperwork on May 3, 2018 and was initially the only candidate to do so.
The Division of Elections notified Trotti the seat would be filled by gubernatorial appointment, not by election; Trotti filed for declaratory relief and an ex parte preliminary injunction to block appointment and keep him on the ballot.
The Second Judicial Circuit granted the preliminary injunction, enjoining the Governor from appointing a successor and ordering the Secretary of State to keep Trotti on the ballot.
The 1st DCA reversed, holding the circuit court erred because Trotti I (Trotti v. Detzner) is controlling: when a resignation with a future effective date is accepted before the qualifying period, the vacancy occurs upon acceptance and must be filled by gubernatorial appointment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the vacancy must be filled by election or gubernatorial appointment	Trotti: Foster’s mandatory retirement made the vacancy a "known vacancy" that should be filled by election under Spector	Scott/Detzner: Acceptance occurred before qualifying; under Trotti I and the Constitution the vacancy is filled by appointment	Vacancy occurred when Governor accepted resignation; appointment required (Trotti I controls)
Whether the circuit court had to follow Trotti I precedent	Trotti: Trotti I is distinguishable due to mandatory retirement and motive to resign	Appellants: Trotti I is binding precedent; subjective motives are irrelevant; bright-line rule controls	Trotti I is binding; trial court erred in disregarding it
Whether concurring opinions in Pincket alter controlling law	Trotti: Pincket concurrences suggest Spector should control and Trotti I was wrong	Appellants: Unpublished concurrences are nonprecedential and do not overrule Trotti I	Pincket concurrences are not controlling precedent; cannot displace Trotti I
Whether injunction served the public interest	Trotti: Injunction preserves voters’ right to elect successor	Appellants: Injunction would produce an uncontested, in-name-only election and disenfranchise voters; appointment allows earlier contested election	Injunctive relief would not serve public interest; appointment better preserves electoral process in practice

Trotti v. Detzner, 147 So. 3d 641 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (establishing bright-line rule that a resignation with a future effective date creates a vacancy upon gubernatorial acceptance, requiring appointment if acceptance precedes qualifying)
Spector v. Glisson, 305 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 1974) (recognized exception favoring election when vacancy timing renders appointment unreasonable)
In re Advisory Op. to the Gov. re Appointment or Election of Judges, 983 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 2008) (advocating a fixed-date rule for commencement of the election process)
In re Advisory Op. (Judicial Vacancies), 600 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1992) (discussing when vacancies are deemed to occur for appointment/election purposes)
In re Adv. Op. re Judicial Vacancy Due to Resignation, 42 So. 3d 795 (Fla. 2010) (interpreting article V regarding resignations and appointments)
Pardo v. State, 596 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1992) (district court decisions bind trial courts)
Wood v. Fraser, 677 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (trial courts must follow higher-court precedent)
City of Jacksonville v. Naegle Outdoor Advertising Co., 634 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (standard for substantial likelihood of success for preliminary injunction)
State, Dep’t of Health v. Bayfront HMA Med. Ctr., LLC, 236 So. 3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (preliminary injunction is extraordinary and four-part test applies)