45 A.3d 54
Vt.2012Background
- Rhodes, a Town of Georgia resident, sought to determine TH #20’s location and obtain vehicular access to his land, while neighbors opposed access and maintained use of TH #20 for personal storage.
- The Town earlier discontinued TH #20 in 1971; a culvert allowing access via Unnamed Road was removed in 1994, hindering Rhodes’s access.
- Rhodes prevailed in state court (2002) finding TH #20 a highway and discriminating conduct by the selectboard, and the superior court later remanded or enforced remedies.
- Separately, Rhodes and neighbors disputed the Unnamed Road and the “pent” road; 2004 decisions held Unnamed Road as a public highway and the pent road not a town road.
- In 2006 the Town reclassified Unnamed Road as a trail and declined to maintain TH #20, leading Rhodes to file conversion and damages claims in state court, with portions of the federal cases remanded to state court for remedies.
- The Vermont Supreme Court ultimately held that Article 7 is self-executing and permits monetary damages for a constitutional violation under stringent $three-element$ criteria, remanding for damages recalculation and possible reclassification relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Article 7 is self-executing | Rhodes—Rhodes argues Article 7 creates a private right of action. | Town contends no private damages remedy or self-executing provision exists. | Article 7 is self-executing. |
| Whether monetary damages are available for Article 7 violations | Rhodes seeks compensatory damages for discriminatory conduct. | Town argues no damages absent statutory remedies. | Damages are available, but remanded to recalibrate amount. |
| Whether remand for damages and reclassification relief is appropriate given alternative remedies | Damages are necessary due to ongoing discrimination and delay. | Injunctive relief may suffice; damages should be limited. | Remand for damages calculation and possible reclassification relief appropriate; injunctive relief not always sufficient. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shields v. Gerhart, 163 Vt. 219 (1995) (implied damages under state constitution after assessing available remedies)
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (recognizes private damages remedy for constitutional violations in federal context; influences state-d constitutional torts)
- Davis v. Burke, 179 U.S. 399 (1900) (tests self-execution: provides rule for when a constitutional provision contains enough to enforce rights without legislation)
- State v. Badger, 141 Vt. 430 (1982) (principles about the Vermont Constitution as independent authority)
- Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194 (1999) (analysis of Article 7’s scope and government favoritism)
- Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000) (class-of-one equal protection: intentional different treatment with no rational basis; intent requirement influencing damages)