Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343 (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 BENEFITS

(Cite as: 21 V.S.A. § 1343)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 51 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1961–2026 · leading case: Riddel v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 436 A.2d 1086 (Vt. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Riddel v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 436 A.2d 1086 (Vt. 1981). · cites it 15× “They were therefore found to be ineligible for benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. § 1343 (d). The claimants limit their appeal to two issues.”
In Re Platt, 292 A.2d 822 (Vt. 1972). · cites it 6× “be summarized briefly: (1) does the evidence support the find *331 ings of the board; (2) do the findings support the conclusion that the plaintiff-claimant was not “unemployed” within the terms of 21 V.S.A. § 1343; and (3) do the findings support the conclusion that the…”
In Re Prouty, 310 A.2d 12 (Vt. 1973). · cites it 5× “On January 4, 1972, the claims examiner found that her refusal was justified because the job was unsuitable, but he determined that she was not available for work because she was unable to work all hours customary to her usual employment in the area, citing 21 V.S.A. §§ 1343 and…”
Louis F. LaFountain v. Dep't of Labor (Eden Gen. Store, Inc., Emp.), 186 A.3d 613 (Vt. 2018). · cites it 2× “21 V.S.A. § 1343(a)(3) ; In re Platt , 130 Vt.”
Jones v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 442 A.2d 463 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 2× “Benefits were denied to claimant on the basis that he was not in an active status when he became disabled and did not come within the illness disability exception to availability as provided in the then existing law, 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a) (3) (1978) (amended 1981).”
Shufelt v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 531 A.2d 894 (Vt. 1987). · cites it 3× “2 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a) provides that “[a]n unemployed individual shall be eligible to receive benefits with respect to any week only if the commissioner finds that: (3) He is able to work, and is available for work; .”
Donahue v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 454 A.2d 1244 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 3× “We then concluded, however, that to be eligible for unemployment compensation benefits, more is required: 21 V.S.A. § 1343 (a) requires a claimant to be available for work.”
Stoodley v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 449 A.2d 980 (Vt. 1982). · cites it 4× “enefits with respect to any week only if the commissioner finds that: He is able to work, and is available for work; provided, that in determining the availability of any individual *459 with respect to any week, the commissioner may require, in addition to registration at any…”
Nurmi v. Vermont Emp. Sec. Bd., 197 A.2d 483 (Vt. 1963). · cites it 2× “The precise question presented is whether or not the claimants, with child-care or other similar domestic problems, can restrict their hours of employment and still remain "available for work" under the provisions of 21 V.S.A. § 1343(3). Section 1343(3) provides that an…”
Willard v. Vermont Unemployment Comp. Comm'n, 173 A.2d 843 (Vt. 1961). · cites it 2× “” *403 Availability for work is made a condition of eligibility for unemployment compensation by the provisions of 21 V.S.A. §1343(3). For clarity, the eligibility provisions must be read with the disqualification provisions.”
Mayville v. Mayville, 2010 VT 94 (Vt. 2010). “” Although we agree that unemployment is a prerequisite to *10 receiving unemployment compensation benefits, 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a), we believe that the family court’s order does not impute minimum wage income and count unemployment compensation benefits “simultaneously,” as…”
Kelley v. Dep't of Labor, 2014 VT 74 (Vt. 2014). “Although the Legislature has since limited eligibility for unemployment compensation to the notice period when an employee tenders her resignation but is discharged prior to the effective date of that resignation, see 2013, No.”
Show all 51 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(3) — 5 cases
Nurmi v. Vermont Emp. Sec. Bd., 197 A.2d 483 (Vt. 1963). “The precise question presented is whether or not the claimants, with child-care or other similar domestic problems, can restrict their hours of employment and still remain "available for work" under the provisions of 21 V.S.A. § 1343(3). Section 1343(3) provides that an…”
Willard v. Vermont Unemployment Comp. Comm'n, 173 A.2d 843 (Vt. 1961). “” *403 Availability for work is made a condition of eligibility for unemployment compensation by the provisions of 21 V.S.A. §1343(3). For clarity, the eligibility provisions must be read with the disqualification provisions.”
In Re Prouty, 310 A.2d 12 (Vt. 1973). “On January 4, 1972, the claims examiner found that her refusal was justified because the job was unsuitable, but he determined that she was not available for work because she was unable to work all hours customary to her usual employment in the area, citing 21 V.S.A. §§ 1343 and…”
Wheeler v. State of Vermont, 335 F. Supp. 856 (D. Vt. 1972).
Jennifer Parmelee v. Dep't of Labor (Bridge Sch., Lnc.) (Vt. 2023).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(a) — 14 cases
Mayville v. Mayville, 2010 VT 94 (Vt. 2010). “” Although we agree that unemployment is a prerequisite to *10 receiving unemployment compensation benefits, 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a), we believe that the family court’s order does not impute minimum wage income and count unemployment compensation benefits “simultaneously,” as…”
In Re Platt, 292 A.2d 822 (Vt. 1972). “be summarized briefly: (1) does the evidence support the find *331 ings of the board; (2) do the findings support the conclusion that the plaintiff-claimant was not “unemployed” within the terms of 21 V.S.A. § 1343; and (3) do the findings support the conclusion that the…”
Jones v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 442 A.2d 463 (Vt. 1982). “Benefits were denied to claimant on the basis that he was not in an active status when he became disabled and did not come within the illness disability exception to availability as provided in the then existing law, 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a) (3) (1978) (amended 1981).”
Littlefield v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 487 A.2d 507 (Vt. 1984).
Rushlow v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 476 A.2d 139 (Vt. 1984).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(a)(3) — 20 cases
Louis F. LaFountain v. Dep't of Labor (Eden Gen. Store, Inc., Emp.), 186 A.3d 613 (Vt. 2018). “21 V.S.A. § 1343(a)(3) ; In re Platt , 130 Vt.”
Shufelt v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 531 A.2d 894 (Vt. 1987). “2 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a) provides that “[a]n unemployed individual shall be eligible to receive benefits with respect to any week only if the commissioner finds that: (3) He is able to work, and is available for work; .”
Jones v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 442 A.2d 463 (Vt. 1982). “Benefits were denied to claimant on the basis that he was not in an active status when he became disabled and did not come within the illness disability exception to availability as provided in the then existing law, 21 V.S.A. § 1343(a) (3) (1978) (amended 1981).”
Wallace v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 365 A.2d 517 (Vt. 1976).
Jenkins v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 373 A.2d 533 (Vt. 1977).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(a)(4) — 1 case
City of Burlington v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 530 A.2d 573 (Vt. 1987).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(a)(8) — 1 case
Kaifa Dennis v. Dep't of Labor (Health Design Ltd Co.) (Vt. 2023).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(c) — 2 cases
Anthony Adams AIA Architect v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 430 A.2d 446 (Vt. 1981).
Gilbert v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 421 A.2d 1295 (Vt. 1980).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(c)(1) — 3 cases
State v. Julianne Graham, 2016 VT 48 (Vt. 2016).
Delneo v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 533 A.2d 1190 (Vt. 1987).
Lionel Beasley v. Dep't of Labor (Champlain Coll., Inc., Emp.), 199 A.3d 553 (Vt. 2018).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1343(d) — 5 cases
Riddel v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 436 A.2d 1086 (Vt. 1981). “They were therefore found to be ineligible for benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. § 1343 (d). The claimants limit their appeal to two issues.”
Donahue v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 454 A.2d 1244 (Vt. 1982). “We then concluded, however, that to be eligible for unemployment compensation benefits, more is required: 21 V.S.A. § 1343 (a) requires a claimant to be available for work.”
Skidmore v. Dep't of Labor, 172 A.3d 1210 (Vt. 2017).
Gilbert v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 421 A.2d 1295 (Vt. 1980).
Jason Lillie v. Dep't of Labor, 194 A.3d 267 (Vt. 2018).
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.