Legal Opinion

In Re Appeal of Rumsey

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 31, 2012No. 2011-356PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.

¶ 1. Petitioner Charlotte Rumsey appeals from a decision of the Vermont Human Services Board denying her Choices for Care (CFC) Services on a tie vote of the Board. The issue before the Board was whether petitioner met the eligibility requirements for either highest need or high need services. We hold that the Board decision fails to meet the requirements of the authorizing statute and was not a decision under V.S.A. § 172. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.

¶ 2. Petitioner was seventy-four years of age at the time of the Board’s evidentiary hearing and lives alone. She suffers from chronic…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Krupp v. KruppSupreme Court of Vermont · 1967
  2. In Re Appeal of Newton EnterprisesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
  3. Dickinson v. DainesNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. In re Hale Mountain Fish & Game Club, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  5. In re E.C.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2010

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re I.G.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2016
  2. In re Grievance of Patrick RyanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API