Court Opinion

ID: 9700761
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 21:48:22.530283+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:06.213007
License: Public Domain

Allen, C.J.,
dissenting. I believe the applicable statutes compel a contrary result. I would also observe without fear of serious contradiction that had the plaintiff asserted a claim for and been awarded workers’ compensation benefits, this Court, without dissent, would have affirmed the grant of the award. It has been repeatedly held by this Court that the remedial purposes of the Act require a liberal interpretation of its provisions in order to accomplish its intended purposes. See Montgomery v. Brinver Corp., 142 Vt. 461, 463, 457 A.2d 644, 646 (1983). Its provisions are not to be rigidly applied to defeat these purposes. The majority opinion ignores these dictates of statutory construction and may frustrate the application of the Workers’ Compensation Act in future cases brought by workers seeking the benefits of the Act.