5 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1998–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Belt Painting Corp. v. TIG Insurancegreen2 sentences2015Co. , 795 N.E.2d 15, 20 (N.Y. 2003) (concluding that terms “discharge” and “dispersal” in total pollution exclusion were ambiguous and did “not clearly and unequivocally exclude a personal injury claim arising from indoor exposure to plaintiff insured’s tools of its trade”). ¶ 42. 2015Co., 795 N.E.2d 15, 20 (N.Y. 2003) (concluding that terms “discharge” and “dispersal” in total pollution exclusion were ambiguous and did “not clearly and unequivocally exclude a personal injury claim arising from indoor exposure to plaintiff insured’s tools of its trade”). ¶ 42. | 3 | 3 |
Milligan v. Milligangreen2 sentences1998“We have repeatedly held that the ‘disposition of property pursuant to a divorce decree is a matter of wide discretion for the trial court.’” Milligan v. Milligan, 158 Vt. 436, 439 , 613 A.2d 1281, 1283 (1992) (quoting Lalumiere v. Lalumiere, 149 Vt. 469, 471 , 544 A.2d 1170, 1172 (1988)). 1998“We have repeatedly held that the ‘disposition of property pursuant to a divorce decree is a matter of wide discretion for the trial court.’” Milligan v. Milligan, 158 Vt. 436, 439 , 613 A.2d 1281, 1283 (1992) (quoting Lalumiere v. Lalumiere, 149 Vt. 469, 471 , 544 A.2d 1170, 1172 (1988)). | 1 | 1 |
Lalumiere v. Lalumieregreen2 sentences1998“We have repeatedly held that the ‘disposition of property pursuant to a divorce decree is a matter of wide discretion for the trial court.’” Milligan v. Milligan, 158 Vt. 436, 439 , 613 A.2d 1281, 1283 (1992) (quoting Lalumiere v. Lalumiere, 149 Vt. 469, 471 , 544 A.2d 1170, 1172 (1988)). 1998“We have repeatedly held that the ‘disposition of property pursuant to a divorce decree is a matter of wide discretion for the trial court.’” Milligan v. Milligan, 158 Vt. 436, 439 , 613 A.2d 1281, 1283 (1992) (quoting Lalumiere v. Lalumiere, 149 Vt. 469, 471 , 544 A.2d 1170, 1172 (1988)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lowell P. McKinney v. Waterman Steamship Corporation
green
1 sentence1998Similarly, in *454 McKinney the court of appeals ruled that information conveyed to the plaintiff’s attorney would be imputed to the plaintiff so as to trigger the statute of limitations and bar the plaintiff’s personal injury claim. 925 F.2d at 4-5 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.