Case Title: Casella Construction, Inc. v. Department of Taxes

Citation: 178 Vt. 61, 2005 VT 18, 869 A.2d 157

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2005-02-04T00:00:00Z

Document:
Casella Construction, Inc. v. Dept. of Taxes (2003-269); 178 Vt. 61; 
869 A.2d 157

2005 VT 18

[Filed 04-Feb-2005]

       NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under
  V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont
  Reports.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
  Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of
  any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes
  to press.

                                 2005 VT 18

                                No. 2003-269

  Casella Construction, Inc.	                 Supreme Court

                                                 On Appeal from
       v.	                                 Rutland Superior Court

  Department of Taxes	                         November Term, 2004

  Richard W. Norton, J.

  John A. Serafino of Ryan Smith & Carbine, Ltd., Rutland, for
    Plaintiff-Appellee.

  William H. Sorrell, Attorney General, and Danforth Cardozo, III, Special
    Assistant Attorney General, Montpelier, for Defendant-Appellant. 

  PRESENT:  Dooley, Johnson, Skoglund and Reiber, JJ., and 
            Allen, C.J. (Ret.), Specially Assigned

       ¶  1.  ALLEN, C.J. (Ret.), Specially Assigned.  Pursuant to a motion
  for reargument filed by appellee Casella Construction, Inc. from our
  decision in Casella Construction, Inc. v. Dep't of Taxes, No. 03-269 (Vt.
  March 10, 2004) (unpub. mem.), we consider the question of our jurisdiction
  over this appeal.  Casella maintains that we lack jurisdiction because the
  Department of Taxes filed an untimely notice of appeal.  As discussed
  below, we conclude that the Department's notice of appeal was timely under
  V.R.A.P. 4, and we therefore have jurisdiction. 
   
       ¶  2.  The superior court issued its final judgment in this matter
  on May 7, 2003.  On June 6, 2003, the Department hand-delivered a notice of
  appeal to this Court.  The Department also mailed a notice of appeal to the
  superior court, which that court received on June 9, 2003.  On June 30,
  this Court sua sponte dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction,
  concluding that the Department's notice of appeal had been untimely filed. 
  In an August 2003 entry order, we granted the Department's request to
  reinstate its appeal, indicating that we would consider the jurisdictional
  question with the merits.  In a March 2004 entry order, we concluded that
  we had jurisdiction, and we  reversed the superior court's decision. 
  Casella Constr., Inc. v. Dep't of Taxes, No. 03-269 (Vt. March 10, 2004)
  (unpub. mem.).  In August 2004, we granted Casella's motion for reargument
  on the question of our jurisdiction, and we now reiterate that we have
  jurisdiction over this appeal. 

       ¶  3.  The timely filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional
  requirement.  In re Shantee Point, Inc., 174 Vt. 248, 259,