I think SF has a much better chance at an injunction than seems the consensus here, and if so, it is entirely because of spectacular bungling by the AG’s office. It is entirely possible that SF could be satan incarnate and get an injunction. Here’s why:

1) One exception to abstention is where the parties make a deal. That is, if there is a deal to stop the prosecution, SF can enforce it with a federal court injunction. The existence of a deal is hotly contested– Hood’s lawyer says “there is no deal,” and SF says “there is a deal.” That will be a subject of proof at the hearing, and Judge Bramlette will have to decide whether SF has proved likelihood of success (that it is likely they will prove there is a deal in a final hearing) to win on that issue.

2) Another exception to abstention is where the prosecution is in bad faith. LeBlanc from Keker’s firm made a really strong argument about in the deposition hearing– that this bad faith exception has a technical and precise meaning in the context of abstention, and to prove it, SF would have to show bad faith in the sense that the prosecution could not show probable cause. If that is the law, then, first, there is almost no way SF can make out that prove, and, second (this will be good news to Researcher!) the AG gets to fight back by proving that it has probable cause to prosecute SF. In other words, they can do a junior version of a criminal trial to rebut the claim of bad faith. HOWEVER, that was just LeBlanc’s argument, and I have no idea whether it really is the law– I haven’t read the cases. I believe SF is arguing “bad faith” in a more general sense of its meaning, that the AG is in bad faith because they were using the criminal prosecution to obtain a civil settlement.

If I were Hood and Lawton Hester, and if I thought I had the goods on SF, I’d be planning on making it public tomorrow to show the prosecution is in good faith.

If I were SF, I would focus really hard on the deal they say was made, because it has the double-whammy of proving both there is a deal (exception one) and suggesting bad faith (using the criminal case to obtain the settlement, with bad faith being exception two).

Either avenue of proof should be very, very interesting to the Folo community.