Court Opinion

ID: 9695599
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:24:32.727799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:14.433824
License: Public Domain

Smith, J.
Dissenting. The question presented is whether the repeal by the General Assembly of 1959 of 12 V.S.A. §2552 revokes a right of direct appeal to this Court from probate courts from “an order, sentence, decree or denial of a probate court involving only a question of law.” The majority opinion holds that it did not. I cannot concur in this opinion.
The probate court is one of limited and special jurisdiction, deriving all its authority from the statutes. The right of appeal from a probate court is a mere legislative privilege to be granted or witheld as may seem best to the lawmaking body. In re Walker Est. 112 Vt. 148, 151, 22 A.2d 183; In re Whittemore, 118 Vt. 282, 283, 108 A.2d 406.
The Legislature granted a right of appeal from probate court only to the county court until 1917. The General Assembly of that year enacted No. 89 of the Acts of 1917:
“Section 1. A person interested in an order, sentence, decree or denial of a probate court involving only a question of law may take an appeal therefrom directly to the supreme court in the manner provided in cases of appeals from chancery.”
This enactment became G. L. 3451 in the 1917 Revision of the General Laws of Vermont, and, under a new heading of “Appeals,” with subheading “to the Supreme Court,” appears in the exact language of No. 89 of the Acts of 1917. This section, amended from time to time, became 12 V.S.A. §2552, repealed by the 1959 General Assembly.
Prior to 1917, a section (P.S. 2972) of the Statutes headed “Appeals to the County Court” read as follows: “The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction of questions of law arising in the course of the *451proceedings of the county court in probate matters as in other causes.” Because of the new right of appeal granted by G. L. 3451, it was necessary that the revisionist, preparing the General Laws of Vermont of 1917, revise P.S. 2872. This was done by adding the words “and probate courts” to former P.S. 2872 as it now appeared in G.L. 3454. This section, unchanged, is now 12 V.S.A. §2551. It is this section, says the majority, that confers the right of appeal directly from the probate court to the Supreme Court.
But the right of appeal directly from the probate court to the Supreme Court as granted by the lawmaking body was given in 12 V.S.A. §2552. This is demonstrated in various opinions of this Court handed down after the 1917 enactment
In the case of In re Robinson’s Will, 101 Vt. 464, 466, 144 Atl. 457, Chief Justice Powers said: “Some suggestion is made that the appeal is defective in the manner of its taking; but the statute provides (G. L. 3451) that such appeals may be taken to this court in the manner provided in cases of appeals from the court of chancery.” Later, in the case of In re Gates, 107 Vt. 404, 408, 187 Atl. 801, the Court said: “the appeal in this case was taken under the provisions of P. L. 3001.” In the more recent case of Ricci v. Bove’s Est., 116 Vt. 335, 75 A.2d 682, there appears “This case is here under V.S. 47, 3086.” All statutes above mentioned are in direct line of ancestry of 12 V.S.A. §2552.
Highly significant, in my opinion, is that at no time in the past has 12 V.S.A. §2551 been cited by this Court as the authority for an appeal to this Court from the probate court. This is because, in my view, the lawmakers grant of this right of appeal had always been expressed in 12 V.S.A. §2552, and its repeal revoked the grant.
In attempting to understand the legislative intent in its repeal of 12 V.S.A. §2552, it is my belief that the passage, at the same session, of 12 V.S.A. §2386 is of utmost importance. If the repeal of 12 V.S.A. §2552 eliminated the right of direct appeal from the probate court to the Supreme Court on questions of law, after final judgment, it can be presumed that the Legislature realized that the only appeal they had left to a dissatisfied litigant in the probate court was the ancient right of appeal to the county court.
But, on questions of law, the statutes make clear that the final determination of such questions is in the Supreme Court, and that there is a right of appeal from the county courts to this Court on matters of law. Therefore, although the Legislature repealed the Act which allowed an appeal from the probate court to the Supreme Court *452as a matter of right, they enacted 12 V.S.A. §2386 so that an appellant could still have questions of law determined by this Court without an intermediate appeal to the county court. The Supreme Court still has jurisdiction of direct appeals from . probate courts under this new remedy. It is to such jurisdiction that 12 V.S.A. §2552 now refers.
The right of appeal from probate courts is one that the Legislature has the power to bestow, withhold, or alter in its wisdom. The legislative history of Vermont makes clear that such power has been frequently exercised. In my opinion, such power was knowingly exercised by the General Assembly of 1959 in the repeal of 12 V.S.A. §2552, and the enactment of 12 V.S.A. §2386.
In my view, the recommendations of the Commission appointed by the General Assembly of 1957 have no weight in considering the intention of the General Assembly of 1959 in repealing 12 V.S.A. §2552. The Commission, as the majority opinion correctly points out, has given no authority to “abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right of the jurisdiction of any court . . . .” The Commission had only the power to formulate proposed rules of practice and procedure for consideration of the 1959 General Assembly. This was all that the Commission did. The Act of the General Assembly in repealing various sections of the statute in 1959, including 12 V.S.A. §2552, was done with no dependence upon committee recommendation on such repeals, for no such recommendation existed.
Neither can I find any authority for a right of appeal directly from the probate court to this Court under 12 V.S.A. §2382. This is a procedural statute, applicable only to actions “appealable” from any court. In my view, the repeal of 12 V.S.A. §2552 no longer made “appealable” to the Supreme Court a question of law determined in the probate court, except those certified here by virtue of 12 V.S.A. §2386.
It is my opinion that no right to allow a direct appeal from a final judgment to the Supreme Court now exists in the probate courts.
Despite the fact that 12 V.S.A. §2552 was repealed in 1959, the effect of such repeal has not been considered by this Court until the present time, nor has the repeal of such statute been called to the Court’s attention in any cause presented.
It is, therefore, my opinion, that the appellant in the instant case, as well as the appellant in companion cases, may still be entitled to take an appeal to the county court in their various cases on the grounds of fraud, accident or mistake. 12 V.S.A. §2357.