Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1978–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Vermont courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Roxanne Jones, Mary Kyser, Perry Varner and Velmer Taylor, Plaintiffs v. Board of Commissioners of the Alabama State Bargreen1 sentence2024V.R.A.B. 13(b), (c); see, e.g., Jones, 737 F.2d at 999 (explaining that in imposing five-attempt limitation on bar examination, Alabama “in effect adopts a rebuttable presumption of incompetence, affords applicants five opportunities to rebut the presumption by passing the bar examination, and then essentially adopts as fact as to those individuals who fail the examination five times what it formerly presumed, their incompetency to practice law”). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Blockgreen1 sentence1992See Robinson v. Block, 869 F.2d 202, 211-12 (3d Cir. 1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Vance
green
1 sentence2024Some courts have noted that the rule has “operated like [a] . . . statute of limitations,” Vance, 403 S.E.2d at 498 , but this confusion arises from the rule’s application both by statute in (now-abolished) private appeals of murder and at common law in 6 public murder prosecutions. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Mullaney v. Wilbur
green
1 sentence1983The creation of this presumption, claims the defendant, violates the due process requirements established by the United States Supreme Court in Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684 (1975). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
United States Department of Agriculture v. Murry
green
1 sentence1978United States Department of Agriculture v. Murry, 413 U.S. 508 (1973). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.