Brian L. Burgess

The case involved defendant Yai Bol, who was convicted of providing false information to a police officer and possession of cocaine after a jury trial. The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court improperly denied his peremptory challenge to strike the only black juror from the panel without first establishing a prima facie case of racial discrimination under Batson v. Kentucky. The Vermont Supreme Court agreed, holding that the trial court misapplied federal constitutional law by requiring a race-neutral reason without the prerequisite showing of discrimination, and that such an error in denying a peremptory challenge warranted reversal. Accordingly, the court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

The case involved a divorced husband appealing a family court's order garnishing his Social Security disability benefits to cover alimony arrears, where the court had included his veterans' disability benefits in calculating his disposable earnings for the garnishment limit. The Vermont Supreme Court reversed, holding that the veterans' benefits could not be included because they are not remuneration for employment under federal law. The court reasoned that 42 U.S.C. § 659 allows garnishment of such benefits only if based on employment remuneration, which these nonservice-connected payments are not, so they are excluded from the aggregate disposable earnings calculation under 15 U.S.C. § 1673. Therefore, only up to 55% of the Social Security benefits could be garnished.

family lawfederal power

The case involved U.S. Bank National Association's foreclosure action against homeowner Christine Kimball for defaulting on a mortgage loan originally issued by Accredited Home Lenders. U.S. Bank claimed it had been assigned the note and mortgage but attached only undated endorsements and an affidavit from a mortgage servicer employee to support its standing. The trial court granted summary judgment to the homeowner, ruling that U.S. Bank failed to show it held the note at the time the complaint was filed. The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal with prejudice, holding that the lack of dated assignments meant there was no evidence of timely ownership or right to enforce the note. The court remanded the matter for consideration of the homeowner's request for attorney's fees.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned whether Mountain View Community School, a licensed nonprofit independent elementary school in Rutland, Vermont, qualified for a property tax exemption under 32 V.S.A. § 3802(4) for lands owned by "colleges, academies or other public schools." The school had paid taxes under protest but sought the exemption after assessments rose sharply; the City denied it, and the trial court ruled against the school by applying the "public use" test that requires direct benefit to an indefinite class of the public. The Vermont Supreme Court reversed, holding that the statute's exemptions are disjunctive and that the "public school" clause does not require the public-use criteria; instead, a nonprofit educational corporation licensed by the state that uses the property solely for schooling meets the exemption. The Court found the undisputed facts satisfied these requirements and remanded for entry of judgment for the school.

taxesproperty

The case involved defendant Graham Simmons appealing the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of a stolen laptop and other items found during a search of his residence pursuant to a warrant. Police obtained the warrant after using inquest subpoenas to MySpace and Verizon to link the defendant's IP address to unauthorized access of a neighbor's wireless network, following an anonymous tip about stolen property. The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's ruling, concluding that the defendant failed to properly preserve his claim of a warrantless search violating Chapter I, Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution and that any error was not plain error, while the anonymous informant's reliability was irrelevant to establishing probable cause for the warrant.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved neighbors appealing the grant of a zoning permit to Bradford Tyler for constructing a self-storage facility in the Village Commercial District of Dorset, Vermont. The Vermont Supreme Court reversed the Environmental Division's decision that the facility qualified as a permitted "retail sales/rentals" use. The court reasoned that the plain language of the zoning bylaws, interpreted with ejusdem generis, limits such uses to retail sales or rentals of merchandise or services to consumers, not the rental of storage space, particularly where many potential customers were businesses.

propertybusiness & regulatory