Title: Hunt v. Village of Bristol

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

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.

                                 No. 92-056

 Wayne E. Hunt                                Supreme Court

                                              On Appeal from
      v.                                      Addison Superior Court

 Village of Bristol and Village               November Term, 1992
 of Bristol Board of Trustees


 Frank G. Mahady, J.

 James F. Carroll of Powers, English & Carroll, Ltd., Middlebury, for
    plaintiff-appellant

 Steven F. Stitzel and Patti R. Page of Stitzel & Page, P.C., Burlington, for
    defendant-appellee


 PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Gibson, Dooley, Morse and Johnson, JJ.


      MORSE, J.   In August 1991, Wayne Hunt was fired as police chief of
 Bristol, Vermont.  He sought relief under V.R.C.P. 75 in superior court, and
 his complaint was dismissed on the ground that certiorari review was
 unavailable because no substantial constitutional issue was raised.  He
 appeals here.  We reverse.
      The police chief was dismissed under 24 V.S.A. { 1932 (removal or
 suspension of police officer after hearing).  Review of governmental action
 is governed by V.R.C.P. 74 and 75.  Rule 74 applies when review is provided
 by statute.  When legislation is silent on the mode of review, rule 75
 governs the appellate procedure if review is "available by law."  Review is
 not "available by law" when the Legislature has declared that an "action of
 a tribunal shall be final."  Mason v. Thetford School Board, 142 Vt. 495,
 498-99,