Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)

Citation
Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)
Parent Document
Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
2001-11-09

Other Sections in This Document (112)

Full Text

988 chars
Tenants contend that in allocating the burden of proof, the trial court failed to follow the Court's direction in Gokey v. Bessette, 154 Vt. 560, 580 A.2d 488 (1990). In Gokey, we held that the retaliatory eviction statute, 9 V.S.A. § 4465(a)(2), did not contemplate use of a subjective test for evaluating what is retaliatory conduct. Id. at 564, 580 A.2d at 491. We reasoned "[a] subjective test would effectively establish such a high burden of proof for tenants that the benefit the Legislature intended to confer would be an illusion." Id. Contrary to tenants' claim here, Gokey did not relieve tenants of their burden to prove a retaliatory eviction. Instead, it relieved tenants of the obligation to establish retaliation by proving landlords' subjective intent. Gokey imposed an objective test for evaluating "what is and is not retaliatory." Under this test, tenants can rely on the surrounding facts and circumstances to fulfill their burden of proving retaliatory eviction. Id.