Stoll v. Burlington Electric Department
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Dissent
Dooley, J.,
¶ 11. dissenting. The majority opinion has created an intricate appeal route that requires going to two courts, the superior and Supreme Court, in most cases where the employee wants to exercise the statutory right to trial by jury. Moreover, the Commissioner determines where a party must appeal, and how often; as shown in this case, this power is fundamentally at odds with that of a neutral adjudicator. I do not believe that this appeal regime is commanded by statute, and in a case like this, it is fundamentally unfair to a seventy-one-year-old claimant who may not live long…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. SurdamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
- Letourneau v. A.N. Deringer/Wausau InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
- Carter v. Fred's Plumbing & Heating, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2002
- Kenney v. Rockingham School DistrictSupreme Court of Vermont · 1963
- Pitts v. Howe Scale Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1938
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.