Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Vermont opinions name it 2 courts 1959–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Vermont courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdinegreen2 sentences2026If the trier of fact believes the plaintiff’s evidence, and if the employer is silent in the face of the presumption, the court must enter judgment for the plaintiff because no issue of fact remains in the case.” Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254 (1981) (emphasis added). 2015Burdine, 450 U.S. at 254 (footnote omitted). ¶ 17. | 2 | 2 |
In re Ahmed M. Hamid-Ahmedgreen2 sentences2025See In re Hamid-Ahmed, 2018 VT 113, ¶ 7 , 208 Vt. 536 , 200 A.3d 179 (“[I]f the plain meaning is clear on the face of the rule, it must be enforced as such.”). 2025See In re Hamid-Ahmed, 2018 VT 113, ¶ 7 , 208 Vt. 536 , 200 A.3d 179 (“[I]f the plain meaning is clear on the face of the rule, it must be enforced as such.”). | 1 | 1 |
Katherine Heffernan v. Stategreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., Heffernan v. State , 2018 VT 47 , ¶ 7, --- Vt. ----, 187 A.3d 1149 (noting that "interpretation begins with the plain language" and "if the language in question is clear," analysis ends). ¶ 8. 2018See, e.g., Heffernan v. State , 2018 VT 47 , ¶ 7, --- Vt. ----, 187 A.3d 1149 (noting that "interpretation begins with the plain language" and "if the language in question is clear," analysis ends). ¶ 8. | 1 | 1 |
Tarrant v. Department of Taxesgreen1 sentence2015See Tarrant v. Dep’t of Taxes, 169 Vt. 189, 196-97 (1999) (“[W]e presume that the Legislature adds and removes statutory language advisedly.”). | 1 | 1 |
Godin v. Godingreen2 sentences2013Godin, 168 Vt. at 524 , 725 A.2d at 911 (“It is thus readily apparent that a parent-child relationship was formed, and it is that relationship, and not the results of a genetic test, that must control.”). 2013Godin, 168 Vt. at 524 , 725 A.2d at 911 (“It is thus readily apparent that a parent-child relationship was formed, and it is that relationship, and not the results of a genetic test, that must control.”). | 1 | 1 |
Rhoades v. Book Pressgreen1 sentence1986With respect to the third exception, a wrongfully discharged employee may maintain an action against his employer “in the face of a defense based upon the failure to exhaust contractual remedies, provided the employee can prove that the union as bargaining agent breached its duty of fair representation in its handling of the employee’s grievance.” Vaca, supra, 386 U.S. at 186 ; Rhoades v. Book Press, 458 F. Supp. 674, 678 (D. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Vaca v. Sipes
green
2 sentences2010In Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171 (1967), the U.S. Supreme Court recognized an exception to the general rule of exhaustion of remedies in cases brought against employers. …[T]he wrongfully discharged employee may bring an action against his employer in the face of a defense based upon the failure to exhaust contractual remedies, provided the employee can prove that the union as bargaining agent breached its duty of fair representation in its handling of the employee's grievance. 1986With respect to the third exception, a wrongfully discharged employee may maintain an action against his employer “in the face of a defense based upon the failure to exhaust contractual remedies, provided the employee can prove that the union as bargaining agent breached its duty of fair representation in its handling of the employee’s grievance.” Vaca, supra, 386 U.S. at 186 ; Rhoades v. Book Press, 458 F. Supp. 674, 678 (D. | 2 | 1986–2010 |
State v. Daniel L. Larkin
green
2 sentences2020Accordingly, we will affirm in the face of error only if the error is harmless.5 State v. Larkin, 2018 VT 16, ¶ 21 , 206 Vt. 535 , 183 A.3d 589 . 2020Accordingly, we will affirm in the face of error only if the error is harmless.5 State v. Larkin, 2018 VT 16, ¶ 21 , 206 Vt. 535 , 183 A.3d 589 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. LaBounty
green
2 sentences2016State v. LaBounty, 2005 VT 124, ¶ 4 , 179 Vt. 199 , 892 A.2d 203 . 2016State v. LaBounty, 2005 VT 124, ¶ 4 , 179 Vt. 199 , 892 A.2d 203 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Petition of Central Vermont Public Service Corp.
green
1 sentence1959The record standing thus, — "We will not conjecture that the Commission concealed anything behind anything, particularly in the face of the presumption that it did its duty.” Petition of Central Vermont Public Service Corp., 116 Vt 206, 220, 71 A2d 576, 585 . | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.