Young V. Red Clay Consol. Sch. Dist., 122 A.3D 784 (Del
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE REBECCA YOUNG, ELIZABETH H. ) YOUNG and JAMES L. YOUNG, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 10847-VCL ) RED CLAY CONSOLIDATED ) SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) ) Defendant. ) OPINION Date Submitted: February 23, 2017 Date Decided: May 24, 2017 Richard H. Morse, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF DELAWARE, Wilmington, Delaware; John W. Shaw, Karen E. Keller, Jeffrey T. Castellano, David M. Fry, Nathan R. Hoeschen, SHAW KELLER LLP. Counsel for Plaintiffs. Barry M. Willoughby, William W. Bowser, Michael P. Stafford, Margaret M. DiBianca, YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware. Counsel for Defendant. LASTER, Vice Chancellor. In February 2015, Red Clay Consolidated School District (“Red Clay”) held a special election in which residents were asked to approve an increase in the school-related property taxes paid by owners of non-exempt real estate located within the district (the “Special Election”). Red Clay prevailed in the Special Election, with 6,395 residents voting in favor and 5,515 against. The plaintiffs are residents of Red Clay who did not vote in the Special Election because they were unable to access the polls. They filed suit, asserting that Red Clay violated the provision of the Delaware Constitution which guarantees that “[a]ll elections shall be free and equal.”1 They also contend that Red Clay’s actions violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.2 This court previously held that the plaintiffs’ theories stated claims on which relief could be granted.3 This decision only addresses their state law claim.
[Show full text]