Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 16 Chapter 53
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subchapter 001 : GENERAL PROVISIONS

(Cite as: 16 V.S.A. § 1752)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Northfield Sch. Bd. v. Washington South Educ. Ass'n & Paul Clayton, 210 A.3d 460 (Vt. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Northfield Sch. Bd. v. Washington South Educ. Ass'n & Paul Clayton, 210 A.3d 460 (Vt. 2019). · cites it 6× “We conclude that, because Clayton and the Association failed to exhaust statutory remedies as required by 16 V.S.A. § 1752, the trial court properly enjoined arbitration, and thus, we affirm the trial court's ruling.”
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Directors, 420 A.2d 861 (Vt. 1980). · cites it 10× “This construction fails to account for the effect of 16 V.S.A. § 1752 (m) which states that “[e]very teacher’s contract shall be deemed to contain the provisions of this statute .”
Petitions of Davenport, 283 A.2d 452 (Vt. 1971). · cites it 9× “The action sought to be reviewed was taken by the school officials under the provisions of 16 V.S.A. § 1752. *550 ■ While the specification of charges and the board’s findings, as they relate to each petitioner, vary in some respects, the procedures followed in each case are the…”
Latouche v. North Country Union High Sch. Dist., 131 F. Supp. 2d 568 (D. Vt. 2001). · cites it 4× “The second is whether the so-called “waiver” provision of the CBA that governs “decisions” to terminate employees’ contracts would also apply to the pre-termination due process (or lack thereof) that is normally governed by Vt.Stat.Ann. tit. 16 § 1752. The third “controlling…”
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Directors, 446 A.2d 377 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 3× “There being no statute on point we must look to prior practice to determine the scope of review available to the plaintiff in its Rule 75 petition to the superior court.”
Brattleboro Union High Sch. Bd. v. Windham Se. Educ. Ass'n, 398 A.2d 285 (Vt. 1979). · cites it 6× “It is 16 V.S.A. § 1752 and relates to the suspension and dismissal of teachers.”
Trombley v. Bellows Falls Union High Sch. Dist. No. 27, 624 A.2d 857 (Vt. 1993). “Because the teachers were not suspended or dismissed, the specific section on hearings in those circumstances, 16 V.S.A. § 1752(b), does not apply. 4 Because the proviso of § 313(a)(1) does not apply, it is unnecessary for us to decide whether the executive session was otherwise…”
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Dir., 446 A.2d 377 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 3× “There being no statute on point we must look to prior practice to determine the scope of review available to the plaintiff in its Rule 75 petition to the superior court.”
Morton v. Essex Town Sch. Dist., 443 A.2d 447 (Vt. 1981). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to 16 V.S.A. § 1752, that suspension was reviewed by the school board on November 10, 1977.”
Bowles v. Robbins, 359 F. Supp. 249 (D. Vt. 1973). · cites it 2× “16 V.S.A. § 1752. See In re Petition of Davenport, 129 Vt.”
Vanderkern v. Burr & Burton (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025). · cites it 21× “VanDerKern claims that the Board failed to comply with the statutory process of 16 V.S.A. § 1752, as mentioned in the agreement, and that nonrenewal required just cause, which the Board did not have.”
Work v. Mount Abraham Union High Sch. Bd. of Directors, 483 A.2d 258 (Vt. 1984). “Title 16 V.S.A. § 1752 (b) states in part: Unless otherwise negotiated, a teacher under contract to teach in a public school whose contract is not to be renewed for the ensuing year for just and sufficient cause shall be notified in writing, setting forth the grounds therefor no…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(b) — 9 cases
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Directors, 420 A.2d 861 (Vt. 1980). “This construction fails to account for the effect of 16 V.S.A. § 1752 (m) which states that “[e]very teacher’s contract shall be deemed to contain the provisions of this statute .”
Trombley v. Bellows Falls Union High Sch. Dist. No. 27, 624 A.2d 857 (Vt. 1993). “Because the teachers were not suspended or dismissed, the specific section on hearings in those circumstances, 16 V.S.A. § 1752(b), does not apply. 4 Because the proviso of § 313(a)(1) does not apply, it is unnecessary for us to decide whether the executive session was otherwise…”
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Directors, 446 A.2d 377 (Vt. 1982). “There being no statute on point we must look to prior practice to determine the scope of review available to the plaintiff in its Rule 75 petition to the superior court.”
Petitions of Davenport, 283 A.2d 452 (Vt. 1971). “The action sought to be reviewed was taken by the school officials under the provisions of 16 V.S.A. § 1752. *550 ■ While the specification of charges and the board’s findings, as they relate to each petitioner, vary in some respects, the procedures followed in each case are the…”
Latouche v. North Country Union High Sch. Dist., 131 F. Supp. 2d 568 (D. Vt. 2001). “The second is whether the so-called “waiver” provision of the CBA that governs “decisions” to terminate employees’ contracts would also apply to the pre-termination due process (or lack thereof) that is normally governed by Vt.Stat.Ann. tit. 16 § 1752. The third “controlling…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(c) — 3 cases
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd. of Sch. Directors, 420 A.2d 861 (Vt. 1980). “This construction fails to account for the effect of 16 V.S.A. § 1752 (m) which states that “[e]very teacher’s contract shall be deemed to contain the provisions of this statute .”
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd., Etc., 420 A.2d 861 (Vt. 1980).
Vanderkern v. Burr & Burton (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025). “VanDerKern claims that the Board failed to comply with the statutory process of 16 V.S.A. § 1752, as mentioned in the agreement, and that nonrenewal required just cause, which the Board did not have.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(d) — 1 case
Petitions of Davenport, 283 A.2d 452 (Vt. 1971). “The action sought to be reviewed was taken by the school officials under the provisions of 16 V.S.A. § 1752. *550 ■ While the specification of charges and the board’s findings, as they relate to each petitioner, vary in some respects, the procedures followed in each case are the…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(j) — 2 cases
Northfield Sch. Bd. v. Washington South Educ. Ass'n (Vt. Super. Ct. 2018).
nsb v. wsea (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(k) — 3 cases
Brattleboro Union High Sch. Bd. v. Windham Se. Educ. Ass'n, 398 A.2d 285 (Vt. 1979). “It is 16 V.S.A. § 1752 and relates to the suspension and dismissal of teachers.”
Northfield Sch. Bd. v. Washington South Educ. Ass'n (Vt. Super. Ct. 2018).
nsb v. wsea (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 1752(m) — 1 case
Burroughs v. West Windsor Bd., Etc., 420 A.2d 861 (Vt. 1980).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.