Legal Opinion

Havill v. Woodstock Soapstone Co.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 13, 2004No. 03-032PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

¶ 1. Defendant Woodstock Soapstone Company appeals the trial court’s conclusions that plaintiff Lois Havill had an implied employment contract with defendant and that defendant breached that contract when it discharged plaintiff without adhering to the procedures for just cause firings detailed in defendant’s personnel policies. Defendant also appeals various aspects of the trial court’s damage award of front and back pay as excessive or unwarranted. Plaintiff cross-appeals the trial court’s damage award because it makes no provision for bonuses and wages plaintiff might have earned but for…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Robertson v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2004
  2. Hybert v. Hearst Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
  3. Barbour v. MerrillCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
  4. Taylor v. National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
  5. Haynes v. Golub Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1997

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Davis v. The American Legion, Department of VermontSupreme Court of Vermont · 2014
  2. State v. WileySupreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  3. Havill v. Woodstock Soapstone Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  4. In Re Grievance of BrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
  5. Zeke Coffee, Inc. v. Pappas-Alstad PartnershipColorado Court of Appeals · 2015

4 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