Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 21 Chapter 17
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1348 (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. § 1348)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Cleveland v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 414 A.2d 1157 (Vt. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cleveland v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 414 A.2d 1157 (Vt. 1980). · cites it 5× “The employer failed to take an appeal within the ten-day appeal period prescribed by 21 V.S.A. § 1348 (a). However, on February 2, 1978, four days after the appeal time had run, the employer’s attorney filed an appeal.”
Holton v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 2005 VT 42 (Vt. 2005). “” 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a). The “provisions” of Title 21, chapter 17 include appeals to the referee and the Board.”
Allen v. Vermont Emp. Sec. Bd., 333 A.2d 122 (Vt. 1975). · cites it 3× “They govern procedure “in the Superior Court in all suits of a civil nature” as well as causes transferred from District Court and appeals to the Superior Court, with stated exceptions.”
Kelley v. Dep't of Labor, 2014 VT 74 (Vt. 2014). “Pursuant to 21 V.S.A. § 1348, claimant appealed to a referee who conducted an administrative hearing.”
Chittenden Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't v. Dep't of Labor, 2020 VT 4 (Vt. 2020). “The CCSD does not dispute that it was provided notice and an opportunity to respond before the ALJ. ¶ 22.”
Trask v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 749 A.2d 1130 (Vt. 2000). · cites it 2× “Claimant now argues that (1) the appeal was timely filed; (2) he was denied due process by a five-day delay between the determination and his receipt of the decision; and (3) he was denied “prompt notice in writing” of the determination in violation of 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a). We…”
Davis v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 438 A.2d 375 (Vt. 1981). “It is the Department, not the physician, which is charged with passing on the claim under 21 V.S.A. § 1348, and the evaluation of all factors surrounding the claim is properly within the Department’s expertise.”
Stryker v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 356 A.2d 534 (Vt. 1976). “The basis of that decision was a *225 determination that she was unavailable for work in terms of 21 V.S.A. § 1348 (a) (3). The issue is now here.”
Mid Vermont Christian Sch. v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 2005 VT 100 (Vt. 2005). “See 21 V.S.A. §§ 1348 (eligibility procedure), *450 1344 (disqualifications).”
Perry v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 523 A.2d 1242 (Vt. 1987). “The claimant appealed the denial to an appeals referee under 21 V.S.A. § 1348. At an April 5 hearing before a referee, claimant was represented by counsel, who participated in the hearing and whose appearance was noted on the record.”
Frye v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 353 A.2d 339 (Vt. 1976). “Our conclusion in this respect is further strengthened by a review of 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a), which, in delineating procedures before a referee, requires only that he give notice in writing of his decision and reasons therefor.”
Elliott v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 409 A.2d 563 (Vt. 1979). “Claimant’s argument that the letter should be construed as a request for reconsideration tolling the time for filing a notice of appeal is totally without merit.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1348(a) — 9 cases
Holton v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 2005 VT 42 (Vt. 2005). “” 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a). The “provisions” of Title 21, chapter 17 include appeals to the referee and the Board.”
Cleveland v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 414 A.2d 1157 (Vt. 1980). “The employer failed to take an appeal within the ten-day appeal period prescribed by 21 V.S.A. § 1348 (a). However, on February 2, 1978, four days after the appeal time had run, the employer’s attorney filed an appeal.”
Trask v. Dep't of Emp. & Training, 749 A.2d 1130 (Vt. 2000). “Claimant now argues that (1) the appeal was timely filed; (2) he was denied due process by a five-day delay between the determination and his receipt of the decision; and (3) he was denied “prompt notice in writing” of the determination in violation of 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a). We…”
Allen v. Vermont Emp. Sec. Bd., 333 A.2d 122 (Vt. 1975). “They govern procedure “in the Superior Court in all suits of a civil nature” as well as causes transferred from District Court and appeals to the Superior Court, with stated exceptions.”
Frye v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 353 A.2d 339 (Vt. 1976). “Our conclusion in this respect is further strengthened by a review of 21 V.S.A. § 1348(a), which, in delineating procedures before a referee, requires only that he give notice in writing of his decision and reasons therefor.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1348(a)(1) — 1 case
Salisbury AD 1, LLC v. Town of Salisbury, 2025 VT 43 (Vt. 2025).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1348(a)(2) — 1 case
Allison Farley v. Dep't of Labor (Vt. 2025).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1348(b) — 3 cases
Allen v. Vermont Emp. Sec. Bd., 333 A.2d 122 (Vt. 1975). “They govern procedure “in the Superior Court in all suits of a civil nature” as well as causes transferred from District Court and appeals to the Superior Court, with stated exceptions.”
Elliott v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 409 A.2d 563 (Vt. 1979). “Claimant’s argument that the letter should be construed as a request for reconsideration tolling the time for filing a notice of appeal is totally without merit.”
Atwood v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 438 A.2d 392 (Vt. 1981).
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.