Lance Mason v. Department of Corrections

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed dismissal without prejudice of Lance Mason’s complaint challenging a Department of Corrections furlough interruption. The court held that Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 74 and 28 V.S.A. § 724 did not provide a basis for review because the interruption resulted from parole revocation rather than a technical furlough violation, and Mason failed to amend his complaint after being given an opportunity to do so.

Holdings

1. A Rule 74 complaint cannot seek review under 28 V.S.A. § 724 of a furlough interruption based on parole revocation rather than a technical violation of community-supervision furlough status. Because Mason's complaint sought relief outside the scope of Rule 74 and § 724, it failed to state a claim and was properly dismissed under Rule 12(b).
2. The trial court provided Mason an adequate opportunity to amend his complaint, and dismissal was proper after he failed to file an amended complaint.
3. Mason was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law because his complaint did not state a claim for relief or provide a basis for such judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mason's Rule 74 complaint stated a claim for review of the DOC's furlough interruption under 28 V.S.A. § 724.
2. Whether the trial court improperly dismissed the action without providing Mason an adequate opportunity to amend his complaint.
3. Whether dismissal denied Mason access to the courts or otherwise violated applicable judicial-conduct rules.
4. Whether Mason was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Disposition

affirmed