Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re Town Highway No. 20

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided March 23, 2012No. 10-100 & 10-338Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Dooley, J.,

¶ 82. concurring and dissenting. In this case, we are asked to decide whether the Common Benefits Clause, Vt. Const, ch. I, art. 7, is self-executing and under the facts presented entitles Rhodes to bring a claim for money damages. The majority answers both questions affirmatively, concluding that the selectboard’s actions unconstitutionally discriminated against Rhodes and remands for a damages award. I wholly concur that Article 7 is a self-executing provision and that a plaintiff disparately treated by a government official motivated by personal ill will may recover monetary…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Carey v. PiphusSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Correctional Services Corp. v. MaleskoSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  5. Memphis Community School District v. StachuraSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API