Document: 401 U.S. 476 91 S.Ct. 856 28 L.Ed.2d 196 Reubin ASKEW et al., Appellants,v.Robert H. HARGRAVE al. No. 573. Argued Feb. 23 and 24, 1971. Decided March 8, Charles E. Miner, Jr., Tallahassee, Fla., for appellants. Hershel Shanks, Washington, D.C., appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 In 1968, Florida enacted a new law the financing of public education through state appropriations local ad valorem taxes assessed by each school district. A section law, Fla.Stat.Ann. § 236.251 (Supp.1970), known as 'Millage Rollback Law,' provided that, to be eligible receive moneys, district must limit teaxes purposes not more than 10 mills valuation, with certain exceptions. Appellees filed this class action in District Court Middle alleging that Millage Law effected an invidious discrimination, violation Equal Protection Clause, against children property-poor counties tax districts such would produce less dollars per child educational other counties. three-judge entered summary judgment appellees' favor upon declaration was unconstitutional, enjoined appellants from withholding funds any virtue provisions Act. Hargrave v. Kirk, 313 F.Supp. 944 (1970). We noted probable jurisdiction. 400 900, 143, 27 137 vacate remand. 2 * Subsequent filing suit, School Board Broward County Christian, 69—932, Circuit Second Judicial Leon County, Florida. That attacks primarily on grounds, violative Constitution. The Court, however, rejected appellants' argument court 'should abstain considering case deference (the) proceeding,' F.Supp., at 946—947, holding under Monroe Pape, 365 167, 81 473, 5 492 (1961), McNeese Education, 373 668, 83 1433, 622 (1963), '(t)he fact remedy is available valid basis federal abstention.' 947. reliance Pape misplaced. point, there 'the remedy, though adequate theory, practice.' 362 U.S., 174, S.Ct., 477. held 'assertion claim (need not) await attempt vindicate same court.' 672, 1436 (emphasis added). See also Wisconsin Constantineau, 433, 507, 515 (1971). Our understanding colloquy oral counsel parties Christian asserts, 'same claim,' is, alleged denial right equal protection, but claims Constitution, which claims, if sustained, will obviate necessity determining Fourteenth Amendment question. case, line decisions Reetz Bozanich, 397 82, 90 788, 25 68 (1970), recent example, states principles should inform exercise Court's discretion whether abstain. II 3 Since remanded, we add another comment. motion considered pleadings affidavit essentially merely verified persuades us they are examination persuade inadequate deciding protection claim. They do sufficiently present facts related only one aspect comprehensive legislative program reorganizing throughout State nearly equalize opportunities all State. Appellants contend formula calling 'a massive infusion money into several districts,' made up loss suffered limitation assessment taxes: 'The net effect 1968 enactments make required reduce millage greatly increase moneys pupil basis.' Appellants' Reply Brief, 4. manner operates may critical decision claim, decided without fully developing factual record hearing. 4 vacated remanded further proceedings consistent opinion. It so ordered. 6 Vacated remanded. 7 Mr. Justice BLACK concurs Part

Category: 8