In Re Verizon Wireless Barton Permit
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Dissent
Davenport, Supr. J.,
¶25. Specially Assigned, dissenting. The line between fundamental fairness and unfair indulgence in the *275treatment of self-represented litigants is not always clear. What is clear is this Court’s “promise to protect the rights of pro se litigants,” In re Estate of Knott, 149 Vt. 245, 247, 542 A.2d 297, 298 (1988) (Dooley, J., dissenting), and ensure that their inexperience does not permit “unfair imposition or unconscionable advantage” to be gained at their expense. Vahlteich v. Knott, 139 Vt. 588, 590, 433 A.2d 287, 288 (1981). Was the trial court’s dismissal of neighbors’…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Desjarlais v. GilmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1983
- Vahlteich v. KnottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1981
- Bingham v. TenneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
- Mathieu Enterprises, Inc. v. Patsy's CompaniesSupreme Court of Vermont · 2009
- In re Estate of KnottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988