Vermont Supreme Court Decisions

Dating from 1777, the Vermont Supreme Court holds the authority to make final decisions in appeals arising from any case in a Vermont court. The Supreme Court also supervises the legal profession in the state, including disciplinary matters for judges and attorneys. It issues rules of procedure for civil, criminal, and family cases, as well as the appellate process. Five justices serve on the Supreme Court, which was ranked as the seventh-most liberal state supreme court in the U.S. in a Stanford University study in 2012.

To serve on the Vermont Supreme Court, a prospective justice must have practiced law in Vermont for more than five of the last 10 years. Vermont imposes a mandatory retirement age of 70 on its justices, so no candidate can be 70 or older. Each justice serves a six-year term. Vermont uses the assisted appointment process to choose justices. This means that the Governor of Vermont reviews a list of candidates and chooses one of them to serve on the Court. Vermont differs from most states with regard to the process of retaining justices. Rather than holding a retention election or a general election, the state requires the legislature to vote on whether a justice should be retained at the end of their term.

A controversial decision by the Supreme Court involved the right to a speedy trial in a criminal case. It overturned a conviction of a defendant who was not tried for nearly three years after he was arrested. The delay resulted from the withdrawals and replacements of several public defenders, often at the defendant’s request. The Supreme Court ruled that the state had violated the defendant’s right to a speedy trial because it had not provided a public defender to represent him in a timely manner. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed this decision, ruling that public defenders work for their clients rather than the state. Delays or gaps in representation caused by the public defender or the defendant do not infringe on the right to a speedy trial.

Browse Opinions From the Vermont Supreme Court

Recent Decisions From the Vermont Supreme Court
Estate of Donald Crofut v. Sean Hammond
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2024 VT 8
Docket Number: 23-AP-212
Carpin v. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation  
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2024 VT 27
Docket Number: 23-AP-217

Justia Opinion Summary: The case involves Shirley Ann Carpin, who sued Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation and Clifton Associates on behalf of her mother's estate for negligence and wrongful death. She alleged that the defendants caused…

In re Brian Butler
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2011 VT 75
Docket Number: 23-AP-238
Marilynne Johnson et al. v. Agency of Transportation (Galloway C. Morris, Appellant)
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2005 VT 83
Docket Number: 23-AP-249
Christina M. Fisher v. Department of Labor
Date: May 10, 2024
Docket Number: 23-AP-259
State of Vermont v. Jeffrey Rivard
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2010 VT 77
Docket Number: 23-AP-289
In re M.M.  
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2024 VT 28
Docket Number: 23-AP-332

Justia Opinion Summary: The case involves a mother and father who appealed an order that declared their daughter, M.M., a child in need of care or supervision (CHINS). The State had filed a petition in April 2023, alleging that M.M., then…

State of Vermont v. Jacob A. Smith
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2013 VT 116
Docket Number: 23-AP-339
Juanita Morris v. Peter Morris
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2009 VT 77
Docket Number: 23-AP-342
Nathan Illsley v. Janeen Fickert
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2019 VT 11
Docket Number: 23-AP-352
Cheryl O’Donnell v. Hope Clough
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2014 VT 88
Docket Number: 23-AP-359
Darlene Seely v. Robert Paluba
Date: May 10, 2024
Docket Number: 23-AP-376
In re: H.B & C.B., Juveniles
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2014 VT 76
Docket Number: 23-AP-405
In re Z.W., Juvenile
Date: May 10, 2024
Citation: 2003 VT 90
Docket Number: 24-AP-019
Stone v. Henneke  
Date: May 3, 2024
Citation: 2024 VT 26
Docket Number: 23-AP-254

Justia Opinion Summary: The case revolves around a dispute over the currency-exchange method used to calculate child-support arrears. The parties, previously married and living in Canada, separated in 2010. The Canadian court awarded the mother…

The opinions published on Justia State Caselaw are sourced from individual state court sites. These court opinions may not be the official published versions, and you should check your local court rules before citing to them. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site, or the information linked to on the state site.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.