Legal Opinion

State Highway Board v. Erickson

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 3, 1975No. 136-74PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarney, C.J.

The City of Rutland is badly in need of relief from traffic congestion because it is a busy community at the intersection of U.S. Route 4 and 7. There is no disagreement as to that need. It is tragic that it must be delayed. This is especially true in the presence of an undisputed finding that, “It is necessary to remove traffic from the Rutland City streets to increase the safety there.”

The Legislature has already recognized this and has ordered action. No. 379 of the Public Acts of 1967 (Adj. Sess.) provides in section 1(6):

The preparation of plans for belt-line highways at Rutland and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Highway Board v. LoomisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1960
  2. State Highway Board v. PrattSupreme Court of Vermont · 1969
  3. State Highway Board v. HazenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1966
  4. State Highway Board v. JacksonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1971
  5. In re HendrickSupreme Court of Vermont · 1972

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Chittenden Solid Waste District v. Hinesburg Sand & Gravel Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  2. State Transportation Board v. MaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API