Russell v. Armitage
Supreme Court of Vermont
1ConcurrenceMorse, J.
Although I concur in the Court’s holding affirming the judgment of contempt, my analysis of the issues differs substantially from that of the Court.
I agree that defendant was not unconstitutionally deprived of the right to counsel, but the reason, in my view, is because he was not entitled to a court-appointed lawyer. The United States Supreme Court has never held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the appointment of counsel in a civil contempt proceeding for nonpayment of child support. Nevertheless, this Court so holds today, relying on the recent decision in…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- In re Marriage of BettsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990
- Vermont Women's Health Center v. Operation RescueSupreme Court of Vermont · 1992
- Town of Nottingham v. Cedar Waters, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.