Case Title: Audet v. Koier

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1990-11-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
Audet v. Koier  ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 90-230 NOVEMBER TERM, 1990 Ronald R. Audet, Sr. } APPEALED FROM: and Marion W. Audet } } v. } Lamoille Superior Court } } Davis Koier, A. Peter Barranco, } Jr. and State of Vermont } DOCKET NOS. S72/92/141-87Lc In the above entitled cause the Clerk will enter: Appellant, plaintiff in a negligence action, has appealed from an adverse jury verdict in forma pauperis and seeks a transcript at the expense of the state. The trial court directed the preparation of a partial transcript at state expense, and the matter is here for approval of this Court as required by V.R.A.P. 10(b). The authority for a state-paid transcript on appeal is contained in V.R.A.P. 24(d): "If an appellant is proceeding in forma pauperis on appeal, all or part of the transcript may be prepared at the expense of the state when required by law." The Reporter's Note to the rule indicates that the requirement to supply the transcript would normally be based on the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Reporter's Notes to 1982 Amendment to V.R.A.P. 24. Appellant asks us to read this rule, and the companion provisions of V.R.A.P. 10(b)(1), as creating an entitlement to a transcript for litigants who are here in forma pauperis or, at a minimum, authority for the court to require the state to pay for the transcript in any such case. The rule was clearly drafted to implement entitlements to state-funded transcripts created outside the rules. It does not itself create an entitlement to a transcript. See Amos v. Department of Health and Rehab. Services, 416 So. 2d 841, 842 (Fla. App. 1982). As appellant concedes, no statute creates a right to a transcript here. Neither the Federal nor the Vermont Constitution create an entitlement. See Almarez v. Carpenter, 347 F. Supp. 597 , 603 (D. Colo. 1972) (Federal Constitution); Almarez v. Carpenter, 173 Colo. 284, 289-93, 477 P.2d 792 , 795-97 (1970) (Federal and Colorado Constitution); Hodgdon v. Gallagher, 113 N.H. 185, 186, 304 A.2d 375, 376 (1973) (Federal Constitution). Thus, we are without authority to require the state to pay for a transcript in this case. The trial court was in error in ordering a transcript at state expense. The request for approval of that order is denied and the matter is remanded to the Lamoille Superior Court for consideration of alternatives under V.R.A.P. 10(c) to allow the appeal to proceed. BY THE COURT: Ernest W. Gibson III, Associate Justice [ ] Publish John A. Dooley, Associate Justice [ ] Do Not Publish James L. Morse, Associate Justice Louis P. Peck, Associate Justice (Ret.), Specially Assigned