St. Martin v. Department of Labor

Reply Brief

more+
less-

The Administrative Law Judge below wrote that the Court in Kasnowski v. Department of Employment Security, 137 Vt. at 382, 406 A.2d at 389. “ruled that ‘[a] quit for something that is only a possibility and has not yet actually occurred does not justify an award for [unemployment]benefits.’”

But the “future possibility rule” is not even the holding of a prior decision of the Vermont Supremet Court. The Department was free to disregard it in applying the law to this case. It failed to do so. The Vermont Supreme Court is not obligated to follow the rationale of Kasnowski. It should decline to do so.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Administrative Agency Updates, Labor & Employment Updates

Reference Info:Appellate Brief | State, 2nd Circuit, Vermont | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Richard Cassidy, Hoff Curtis | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

CONNECT

Richard Cassidy
Hoff Curtis

Richard T. Cassidy has more than 30 years of experience in the practice of law in Vermont. He served... View Profile »


Follow Hoff Curtis:

Reporters on Deadline