Court Opinion

ID: 9748445
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:01:51.665714+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:35.350345
License: Public Domain

Burgess, J.,
¶ 14. concurring in part, dissenting in part. In keeping with the more flexible approach to res judicata in matters before the Environmental Court, I concur that the doctrine of successive application, rather than Rule 60, should govern disposition of renewed permit applications after a judgment in a contested ease. We should go further, however, and clarify that a party to a stipulated judgment cannot undo that agreement without the consent of the other parties. The rationale of In re Carrier, allowing post-judgment reapplication to planning commissions when the application is “substantially changed so as to respond to objections raised in the original application,” 155 Vt. 152, 158, 582 A.2d 110, 113 (1990), is inapposite to the judgment reached by stipulation in this case. Here, the parties expressly contracted for a permit that specifically excluded a drive-through window. Any record objections to the window as contemplated by Carrier, unless expressly reserved, were resolved by the stipulation to end the litigation.
¶ 15. “Rule 60(b) relief is ordinarily unavailable to relieve one from the effects of a stipulation freely made.” Goshy v. Morey, 149 Vt. 93, 97, 539 A.2d 543, 546 (1987). There is no reason to suggest, by remand, that a different result could obtain under the doctrine of successive application. Chicanery might constitute a necessary exception, but is not claimed in this case.
¶ 16. The settlement here allowed the applicant to proceed with a project that *587might have been stalled, modified, or defeated, but for the settlement. Successive application on the same settled subject matter, in this case the drive-through window, should be foreclosed to the stipulating applicant. Otherwise, no party in opposition to a permit application would risk compromise to settle litigation, for fear the other party has its fingers crossed behind its back.