In re Appeal of Dezarae Durkee, 171 A.3d 33

Applicant (single mother with three children, one child disabled) received a notice of termination without cause for her rented mobile home effective Aug. 2, 2015; she left with her children on Aug. 3 and did not await an eviction order.
Household income consisted solely of the disabled child's SSDI; applicant had no Reach Up cash assistance and limited resources.
Applicant applied to DCF for General Assistance (GA) emergency housing under Rule 2652.2 (catastrophic) and 2652.3 (noncatastrophic/vulnerable persons); DCF denied assistance citing available short-term shelter and later because she had "voluntarily left" housing after a notice to quit and before a court eviction.
Human Services Board upheld DCF: applicant caused her own loss of housing by leaving after receiving the landlord’s notice (no eviction), making her ineligible under GA Rule 2652.3.
Applicant appealed, arguing leaving in response to a termination without cause is not voluntary; she sought declaratory relief and damages. The Supreme Court considered mootness and rule interpretation and ultimately reversed the Board’s decision.

Issue	Durkee's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Mootness: Is the appeal moot because six months passed so Rule 2652.3 disqualification no longer applies?	Case falls under "capable of repetition yet evading review"; future similar termination likely given applicant’s tenuous housing	Rule 2652.3 remedy now available; no live controversy	Not moot: meets the capable-of-repetition-but-evading-review exception
Interpretation of GA Rule 2652.3: Does leaving after a notice of termination without awaiting a court eviction constitute "voluntarily leaving" (causing own loss of housing)?	Leaving in response to a lawful termination is not voluntary; tenant did not cause loss of housing	Tenant caused own loss by vacating before eviction; disqualification appropriate to conserve resources	Reversed: leaving after a notice of termination without cause is not "voluntarily leaving" for purposes of Rule 2652.3; DCF misinterpreted the rule
Remedy: Is declaratory judgment and damages appropriate?	Requests declaratory judgment and reimbursement for motel costs (~$1,200) or equivalent GA benefit	No effective relief needed; DCF says applicant no longer needs immediate shelter	Declaratory judgment granted; damages denied—no proof of out-of-pocket damages and immediate relief period has passed

Bouvier v. Wilson, 139 Vt. 494 (1981) (describing GA as financial assistance toward necessities, not direct housing provision)
Farnham v. Bombardier, Inc., 161 Vt. 619 (1994) (definition and context for "voluntarily")
State v. Blair, 118 Vt. 81 (1953) (discussing requirement that voluntary acts be uninfluenced by others)
Gasoline Marketers of Vt., Inc. v. Agency of Nat. Res., 169 Vt. 504 (1999) (standard for deference to agency interpretation)
In re P.S., 167 Vt. 63 (1997) (mootness doctrine and exceptions, including capable of repetition yet evading review)