Here is the Court of Appeal (1st District) opinion in Cobb v. Thurman, reversing the trial court and holding that an impartial informative sign that a vote for Foley will count for Negron may be posted. The analysis of the court tracks my earlier analysis of Florida statutory provisions and reaches what I think is the right result. Here is an important paragraph from the appellate court decision:

Foley’s name will appear on the ballot but will be a placeholder for Negron’s, creating a complexity in voting that must be made known to voters to enable them to cast an informed and intelligent ballot. Without some explanation, a ballot that omits the name of the legal candidate leads to doubt and uncertainty about the true will of the people. In light of the ample powers vested in election officials to educate, inform, and instruct voters, it is unreasonable to assume that Florida law mandates that voters be kept in the dark about these circumstances while the identity of the actual, lawful candidate is concealed from view. Confused voters should not be required to guess as to how their vote will be counted, or be forced to question poll workers and rely on the potentially inconsistent, incomplete, or partial information provided by the poll workers. Under these circumstances, the posting of a clear, concise notice informing voters that a vote for the withdrawn candidate, whose name appears on the ballot, will be counted for the legal candidate, whose name is not on the ballot, is essential to the voters’ casting an effective vote.

The next stop for Democrats is the Florida Supreme Court. I am gun shy to predict what this court will do, but what this court should do is affirm the First District decision.
UPDATE: Democrats will not appeal.