Legal Opinion
Doe v. Forrest
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided May 7, 2004No. 02-184PublishedCited by 75 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.
¶ 1. This case requires the Court to determine whether a sheriff can be held liable as the employer of a deputy who perpetrates intentional criminal misconduct while on duty. Plaintiff-victim was coerced into performing oral sex by then-Bennington County Deputy Sheriff Richard Forrest (Forrest). Forrest voluntarily pled nolo contendere to charges of lewd and lascivious behavior in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 2601 and neglect of duty in violation of 13 V.S.A § 3006. Plaintiff subsequently filed a civil action against Forrest’s employers, *478Bennington County Sheriff Gary Forrest (Sheriff Forrest)…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Burlington Industries, Inc. v. EllerthSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Hallock v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Coramae Ella Gary v. James Edward LongCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority v. A.B.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2014
- Gallipo v. City of RutlandSupreme Court of Vermont · 2005
- Hamed v. Wayne CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2011
- Zsigo v. Hurley Medical CenterMichigan Supreme Court · 2006
- Jennifer Cox v. Evansville Police Department and The City of Evansville Babi Beyer v. The City of Fort WayneIndiana Supreme Court · 2018
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.