Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 23 Chapter 3
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 105 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(Cite as: 23 V.S.A. § 105)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Marsicovetere v. Dep't of Motor Vehs., 772 A.2d 540 (Vt. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Marsicovetere v. Dep't of Motor Vehs., 772 A.2d 540 (Vt. 2001). “Under the laws relating to motor vehicles, an aggrieved taxpayer may not bring an action directly to the superior court because it does not have jurisdiction over the claim at that point.”
Darrah v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “23 V.S.A. § 105(b). Standard of Review The Vermont Supreme Court has described the applicable standard of review as follows: “Courts presume that the actions of administrative agencies are correct, valid and reasonable, absent a clear and convincing showing to the contrary.”
Paul T. Prevost v. Agency of Transp. (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “See 23 V.S.A. § 105(b). On appeal, appellant argued that the condition requiring total abstinence from alcohol was not authorized by the statute and was unenforceable.”
Kittredge v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “See 23 V.S.A. § 105(a) (describing hearings before the Commissioner).”
Hartley Auto Sales v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “By “appeal,” the letter presumably intended an evidentiary hearing pursuant to the Commissioner’s authority at 23 V.S.A. § 105(a), which provides: In the administration of the laws relating to motor vehicles and to the operators and the operation of motor vehicles, the…”
Ritchie v. State of Vermont (Vt. Super. Ct. 2021). “Ritchie sought administrative review. After an evidentiary hearing, an Agency of Transportation (AOT) hearing officer denied relief.”
Hansen v. Dmv (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025). “Analysis A person aggrieved by a decision of the DMV Commissioner (or a hearing examiner appointed by the Commissioner) made following a hearing "may have such decision reviewed by Order Page 1 of 3 24-CV-05411 William Hansen, Jr.”
Lucas Ashley v. Agency of Transp. (Vt. 2012). “” 23 V.S.A. § 105(a). The same statute also authorizes an appeal generally from “the decision of a hearing under subsection (a),” id.”
Abrell v. Dep't of Motor Vehs. (Vt. Super. Ct. 2015). “Abrell then sought Rule 74 review in this court pursuant to 23 V.S.A. § 105(b). Ms. Abrell, pro se, never filed a brief in this court explaining why she believes the hearing officer erred.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 105(a) — 3 cases
Kittredge v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “See 23 V.S.A. § 105(a) (describing hearings before the Commissioner).”
Hartley Auto Sales v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “By “appeal,” the letter presumably intended an evidentiary hearing pursuant to the Commissioner’s authority at 23 V.S.A. § 105(a), which provides: In the administration of the laws relating to motor vehicles and to the operators and the operation of motor vehicles, the…”
Lucas Ashley v. Agency of Transp. (Vt. 2012). “” 23 V.S.A. § 105(a). The same statute also authorizes an appeal generally from “the decision of a hearing under subsection (a),” id.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 105(b) — 6 cases
Marsicovetere v. Dep't of Motor Vehs., 772 A.2d 540 (Vt. 2001). “Under the laws relating to motor vehicles, an aggrieved taxpayer may not bring an action directly to the superior court because it does not have jurisdiction over the claim at that point.”
Darrah v. State (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “23 V.S.A. § 105(b). Standard of Review The Vermont Supreme Court has described the applicable standard of review as follows: “Courts presume that the actions of administrative agencies are correct, valid and reasonable, absent a clear and convincing showing to the contrary.”
Paul T. Prevost v. Agency of Transp. (Vt. Super. Ct. 2020). “See 23 V.S.A. § 105(b). On appeal, appellant argued that the condition requiring total abstinence from alcohol was not authorized by the statute and was unenforceable.”
Ritchie v. State of Vermont (Vt. Super. Ct. 2021). “Ritchie sought administrative review. After an evidentiary hearing, an Agency of Transportation (AOT) hearing officer denied relief.”
Hansen v. Dmv (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025). “Analysis A person aggrieved by a decision of the DMV Commissioner (or a hearing examiner appointed by the Commissioner) made following a hearing "may have such decision reviewed by Order Page 1 of 3 24-CV-05411 William Hansen, Jr.”
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.