Legal Opinion

Town of Hinesburg v. Dunkling

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 10, 1998No. 96-632PublishedCited by 71 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSkoglund, J.

Defendant/landowner Paul Dunkling appeals the Chittenden Superior Court’s grant of plaintiff/cross-appellant Town of Hinesburg’s summary judgment motion and grant of Town’s request for a mandatory injunction and fine for noncompliance with a town zoning bylaw. Landowner contends that: (1) Town’s notice that the zoning board of adjustment (ZBA) had rendered a decision was insufficient to raise the bar of 24 V.S.A. § 4472 in Town’s subsequent enforcement action, (2) because the assessed fine was punitive in nature, landowner was entitled to the same due process and constitutional safeguards as…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Flemming v. NestorSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. United States v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. One Lot Emerald Cut Stones and One Ring v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by71 opinions

  1. In Re HandySupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
  2. In Re Appeals of LetourneauSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
  3. Wesco, Inc. v. SorrellSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
  4. Springfield Terminal Railway Co. v. Agency of TransportationSupreme Court of Vermont · 2002
  5. Secretary, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. IrishSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999

66 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