CONSTITUTIONAL Abstention; Pullman Doctrine; Arkansas Law

Where a dentist challenged an Arkansas law requiring dentists with a specialty to limit their practice to the specialty and the District Court found that it should abstain from deciding the case under the Pullman doctrine, the statute was clear with no ambiguity, so Pullman abstention was improper, and the case is remanded to the District Court.

Judgment is reversed and remanded.

14-3740 Burris v. Gohl, appealed from the Eastern District of Arkansas, Colloton, J.