Crocker v. Crocker, 2011 VT 82 (Vt. 2011). · Go Syfert
Crocker v. Crocker, 2011 VT 82 (Vt. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. Parkway Cleaners (vt, 2019-03-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. Parkway Cleaners
Vt. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bostock v. City of Burlington , 2011 VT 89 , ¶ 14, 190 Vt. 582 , 30 A.3d 651 (mem.); Fragoso v. Lopez , 991 F.2d 878 , 888 (1st Cir. 1993) (explaining that where summary-judgment motion granted, trial court has substantial discretion in deciding whether to reopen proceedings to allow unsuccessful party to introduce new material or argue new theory). ¶ 14.
discussed Cited "see" Lamay v. State
Vt. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bostock v. City of Burlington, 2011 VT 89, ¶ 17 , 190 Vt. 582 , 30 A.3d 651 (mem.) (observing that it was plaintiffs’ “burden to prove their case during the pendency of the summary judgment motions by putting forth sufficient evidence” and thus holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for reconsideration).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Christine CROCKER
v.
Daniel CROCKER
11-226.
Supreme Court of Vermont.
Jul 18, 2011.
2011 VT 82
Published

¶ 1. We conclude the notice of appeal was untimely filed in this case. A notice of appeal must be filed in the superior court within thirty days of the date of the entry of judgment or order appealed from. V.R.A.P. 4(a). Here, judgment was entered on May 13, 2011, and therefore the notice of appeal needed to be filed by June 13,2011. A facsimile copy of the notice of appeal was received on June 13, but this is not an appropriate method for filing the notice of appeal. V.R.C.P. 5(e) (listing means by which filing may be accomplished to include delivery or sending by first-class mail or commercial carrier). Further, although the rule allows filing to be made with a judge “by any method permitted by the judge,” the record does not indicate that any such permission was sought or received. See Reporter’s Notes — 2006 Amendment, V.R.C.P. 5 (explaining that rule is in line with current practice that may allow fax filing in particular case on showing of good cause). The original notice of appeal was not received by mail until June 14, 2011, one day beyond the deadline. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Motion for reconsideration denied August 9, 2011.