Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5 (2026)

Transportation Board; powers and duties

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(Cite as: 19 V.S.A. § 5)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327.
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. · cites it 19× “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
Earth Constr., Inc. v. State of Vermont Agency of Transp., 2005 VT 82, 882 A.2d 1172. · cites it 3× “” The court then concluded that claims for breach of contract were within the Board’s appellate adjudicative authority, and were, therefore, precluded for the reasons set forth in our prior three-justice panel opinion.”
Luck Bros. v. Agency of Transp., 2014 VT 59, 99 A.3d 997. · cites it 2× “See 19 V.S.A. § 5(c), (f). When the record from the Agency is insufficient for the Board to make an informed decision, it may enhance the record to accomplish that end.”
In re Kelscot, Ltd., 568 A.2d 378 (Vt. 1989). · cites it 11× “I believe that 19 V.S.A. § 5 controls this dispute and, as a result, the jurisdiction nominally placed in the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles (Commissioner) was transferred to the Transportation Board (Board).”
In re Town of Bennington, 641 A.2d 1331 (Vt. 1993). “), § 4 (amending 19 V.S.A. § 5(a)). In the same act, the Legislature transferred the power over limited access facilities, including the power to authorize curb cuts, to the Agency.”
W.M. Schultz Constr., Inc. v. Vermont Agency of Transp., 2018 VT 130, 203 A.3d 1205. “" 19 V.S.A. § 5(c). "It has long been recognized [that] statutes giving and regulating the right of appeal are remedial in nature and should receive a liberal construction in furtherance of the right of appeal.”
In re Petition No. 152 ex rel. Cent. Vermont Ry., Inc., 530 A.2d 579 (Vt. 1987). “§ 3104(c) was repealed and recodified at 19 V.S.A. § 5(c). 1985, No. 269 (Adj. Sess.”
Rutland Hosp v. Gmcb, No. 24-cv-4608 (Vt. Super. Ct. June 18, 2025). “9, 2025 WL 1273006 (appeals to State transportation board under 19 V.S.A. §§ 5(d)(4) and (d)(6) “are not contested cases because there is not an opportunity for a hearing at the [agency] level”); Moran v.”
Roback v. Wash Cty R.R., No. 405-9-17 wrcv (Vt. Super. Ct. Jan. 29, 2026). “) Soon after the Railroad filed its petition, the State Transportation Board—which generally functions as the “regulatory and quasi-judicial” arm of the Agency of Transportation, 19 V.S.A. § 5(a), and whose members are presumptively knowledgeable about issues “in various areas…”
In re Claim of Winterset, Inc., No. 776 (Vt. Super. Ct. Apr. 7, 2014). “” 19 V.S.A. § 5(c). However, it is undisputed that the order at issue here is an interlocutory order, because the evidentiary hearing on the merits of Winterset’s claim has not occurred.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(a): 4 cases
Earth Constr., Inc. v. State of Vermont Agency of Transp., 2005 VT 82, 882 A.2d 1172. “” The court then concluded that claims for breach of contract were within the Board’s appellate adjudicative authority, and were, therefore, precluded for the reasons set forth in our prior three-justice panel opinion.”
In re Town of Bennington, 641 A.2d 1331 (Vt. 1993). “), § 4 (amending 19 V.S.A. § 5(a)). In the same act, the Legislature transferred the power over limited access facilities, including the power to authorize curb cuts, to the Agency.”
In re Kelscot, Ltd., 568 A.2d 378 (Vt. 1989). “I believe that 19 V.S.A. § 5 controls this dispute and, as a result, the jurisdiction nominally placed in the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles (Commissioner) was transferred to the Transportation Board (Board).”
Roback v. Wash Cty R.R., No. 405-9-17 wrcv (Vt. Super. Ct. Jan. 29, 2026). “) Soon after the Railroad filed its petition, the State Transportation Board—which generally functions as the “regulatory and quasi-judicial” arm of the Agency of Transportation, 19 V.S.A. § 5(a), and whose members are presumptively knowledgeable about issues “in various areas…”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(c): 7 cases
Luck Bros. v. Agency of Transp., 2014 VT 59, 99 A.3d 997. “See 19 V.S.A. § 5(c), (f). When the record from the Agency is insufficient for the Board to make an informed decision, it may enhance the record to accomplish that end.”
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
Earth Constr., Inc. v. State of Vermont Agency of Transp., 2005 VT 82, 882 A.2d 1172. “” The court then concluded that claims for breach of contract were within the Board’s appellate adjudicative authority, and were, therefore, precluded for the reasons set forth in our prior three-justice panel opinion.”
W.M. Schultz Constr., Inc. v. Vermont Agency of Transp., 2018 VT 130, 203 A.3d 1205. “" 19 V.S.A. § 5(c). "It has long been recognized [that] statutes giving and regulating the right of appeal are remedial in nature and should receive a liberal construction in furtherance of the right of appeal.”
In re Kelscot, Ltd., 568 A.2d 378 (Vt. 1989). “I believe that 19 V.S.A. § 5 controls this dispute and, as a result, the jurisdiction nominally placed in the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles (Commissioner) was transferred to the Transportation Board (Board).”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(d)(4): 3 cases
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
Luck Bros. v. Agency of Transp., 2014 VT 59, 99 A.3d 997. “See 19 V.S.A. § 5(c), (f). When the record from the Agency is insufficient for the Board to make an informed decision, it may enhance the record to accomplish that end.”
Rutland Hosp v. Gmcb, No. 24-cv-4608 (Vt. Super. Ct. June 18, 2025). “9, 2025 WL 1273006 (appeals to State transportation board under 19 V.S.A. §§ 5(d)(4) and (d)(6) “are not contested cases because there is not an opportunity for a hearing at the [agency] level”); Moran v.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(d)(6): 1 case
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(f): 1 case
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 5(h): 1 case
In re State Airport Hangar Lease Disputes (Scott Winick, Appellants), 2025 VT 21, 336 A.3d 327. “In addition to itemizing the Board’s specific duties and responsibilities, 19 V.S.A. § 5 contains powers and responsibilities of 10 the Board that are applicable to all Board cases.”
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.