Aurora Berger v. Sarah Root et al.

Berger v. Root, Case No. 24-CV-00561 (Vt. Super. Ct. Sept. 24, 2025) · Vermont Superior Court, Civil Division, Orange Unit · December 15, 2025 · No. 24-CV-00561

Summary

This is a decision on a motion for summary judgment in a Vermont state court employment discrimination case. The court granted summary judgment for defendants on claims of disability discrimination and retaliation under Vermont's Fair Employment Practices Act, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding unreasonable delay in providing accommodations or retaliatory motive. However, the court denied summary judgment on the plaintiff's claim that her employment was terminated in violation of her right to free expression under the Vermont Constitution, concluding that factual disputes existed regarding the defendant's motivation related to her personal website.

Holdings

  1. Defendants were entitled to summary judgment because the record showed that the school engaged in the accommodation process in good faith, approved the initial request promptly, modified the accommodations within days after receiving more specific medical information, and thereafter provided accommodations without further dispute.
  2. Defendants were entitled to summary judgment on the VFEPA retaliation claim because Berger offered no direct or circumstantial evidence connecting the June 2023 licensing decision to her accommodation requests, which had successfully concluded in November 2021.
  3. Summary judgment was denied because the record contained evidence from which a factfinder could infer that Berger's website and the school's reaction to it motivated Kinnarney's decision not to seek a one-year provisional-license extension, thereby ending her employment.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Berger's Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act claim alleging an unreasonable delay in providing disability accommodations.
  2. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Berger's VFEPA retaliation claim alleging that the decision not to seek an extension of her provisional teaching license was retaliation for requesting accommodations.
  3. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Berger's Vermont Constitution, chapter I, article 13, claim alleging that defendants effectively terminated her employment in retaliation for protected expression on her personal website.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (17)

  • Morrisseau v. Fayette, 164 Vt. 358, 363 (1995)(followed)
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 327 (1986)(followed)
  • Gallipo v. City of Rutland, 163 Vt. 83, 86 (1994)(followed)
  • Boulton v. CLD Consulting Engineers, Inc., 2003 VT 72, ¶ 29(followed)
  • Murray v. White, 155 Vt. 621, 628 (1991)(followed)
  • Palmer v. Furlan, 2019 VT 42, ¶ 10(followed)
  • Gates v. Mack Molding Company, Inc., 2022 VT 24, ¶ 16, 216 Vt. 379(followed)
  • McCray v. Wilkie, 966 F.3d 616, 621 (7th Cir. 2020)(followed)
  • Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, 138 F.4th 237, 246 (5th Cir. 2025)(followed)
  • In re Shenandoah, LLC, 2011 VT 68, ¶ 17(followed)

Showing top 10 of 17.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…