St. Martin v. Department of Labor

Reply Brief


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.

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

Written by:


Hoff Curtis on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.