Legal Opinion · Dissent

Nelson v. Town of St. Johnsbury, LaMotte, Oddy, Ruggles, Rust, Timson and Town of St. Johnsbury

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided January 16, 2015No. 2013-386Published

1Dissent

Reiber, C.J.,

¶ 67. dissenting. The majority’s solution to the ambiguity inherent in 24 V.S.A. § 1233 — which provides that a town manager shall hold office “at the will of’ the selectmen who “may remove him at any time for cause” — is to conclude that “at *305the will of’ does not mean what we think it means. In the majority’s view, the phrase was not understood by its drafters “in the modern conventional sense” of an employment terminable at any time for any reason. Ante, ¶ 20. In support of this proposition, the majority claims that the at-will concept was not widely employed in Vermont law…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Berube v. Fashion Centre, Ltd.Utah Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Smith v. BryanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1902
  3. Brennan v. Town of ColchesterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  4. O'Dowd v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
  5. Fabrizio v. City of QuincyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1980

10 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