Summary
The Vermont Supreme Court held that the State of Vermont could appeal a Board of Nursing decision under 3 V.S.A. § 130a(a). It further held that attorneys for the Office of Professional Regulation represent the State and may exercise the State’s appellate authority in professional disciplinary proceedings. The court reversed the superior court and reinstated the appellate officer’s decision reversing the Board’s order vacating a consent suspension.
Holdings
- The State was a party to the disciplinary proceeding and could appeal the Board's adverse decision under 3 V.S.A. § 130a(a).
- An attorney assigned by the Office of Professional Regulation represents the State of Vermont in professional disciplinary proceedings and may exercise the State's power to appeal an adverse board decision under 3 V.S.A. § 130a(a).
Questions Presented
- Whether the State could appeal the Board of Nursing's decision under 3 V.S.A. § 130a(a).
- Whether an attorney for the Office of Professional Regulation had authority to represent the State and pursue that appeal.
Disposition
reversed
Cases Cited (8)
- Shaddy v. Brattleboro Retreat, 2012 VT 67, 192 Vt. 215, 57 A.3d 700(cited)
- Shaddy v. Department of Labor, 2009 VT 103, 186 Vt. 633, 987 A.2d 311(cited)
- In re Lakatos, 2007 VT 114, 182 Vt. 487, 939 A.2d 510(followed)
- Office of Professional Regulation v. McElroy, 2003 VT 31, 175 Vt. 507, 824 A.2d 567 (mem.)(cited)
- In re Smith, 169 Vt. 162, 730 A.2d 605 (1999)(cited)
- State v. Wesco, Inc., 2006 VT 93, 180 Vt. 345, 911 A.2d 281(cited)
- State's Attorney v. Attorney General, 138 Vt. 10, 409 A.2d 599 (1979)(cited)
- Lydy v. Trustaff, Inc./Wausau Ins. Co., 2013 VT 44, 194 Vt. 165, 76 A.3d 150(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…