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.
15 Vermont opinions name it 2 courts 1978–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Alpstetten Ass'n, Inc. v. Kellygreen2 sentences2026As the Vermont Supreme Court has long held, when a moving party challenges the factual basis of a claim by affidavit or other documentary evidence, then the non-moving party “may not rest upon his mere allegations, but must come forward with an opposing affidavit or other evidence that raises a dispute as to the fact or facts in issue.” Alpstetten Ass’n v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 (1979); see also Webb v. Leclair, 2007 VT 65, ¶ 14 (reaffirming this standard). 2021See V.R.C.P. 56(e)(2); Alpstetten Ass’n v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 (1979) (“Once a claim is challenged by motion for summary judgment, accompanied by an affidavit or affidavits or other documentary evidence sufficient to call into question the existence of the factual basis for the claim, the person advancing the claim may not rest upon his mere allegations, but must come forward with an opposing affidavit or other evidence that raises a dispute as to the fact or facts in issue.”). 10 Base pay is set forth in the various compensation agreements that comprise Exhibit B to Ms. Mitchell’s Stateme | 5 | 5 |
In re Stocksgreen2 sentences2016Rule 11(f) states that “the court should not enter a judgment upon such plea without making such inquiry as shall satisfy it that there is a factual basis for the plea.” The factual basis requirement of Rule 11(f) “reinforces the goal of ensuring knowing and voluntary pleas” and to satisfy this requirement, there must be a “specific inquiry by the judge into the factual basis for the plea.” In re Stocks, 2014 VT 27, ¶¶ 13, 15 , 196 Vt. 160 . 2016Rule 11(f) states that “the court should not enter a judgment upon such plea without making such inquiry as shall satisfy it that there is a factual basis for the plea.” The factual basis requirement of Rule 11(f) “reinforces the goal of ensuring knowing and voluntary pleas” and to satisfy this requirement, there must be a “specific inquiry by the judge into the factual basis for the plea.” In re Stocks, 2014 VT 27, ¶¶ 13, 15 , 196 Vt. 160 . | 2 | 2 |
Town of Randolph v. Estate of Whitegreen2 sentences2013Div. Apr. 29, 2010) (Wright, J.) (stating that to satisfy due process requirements, a notice of violation must inform the recipients of the factual basis for the violation) (citing Town of Randolph v. Estate of White, 166 Vt. 280 , 284–85 (1997)). 4 2011Town of Randolph v. Estate of White, 166 Vt. 280, 284-5 (1997). | 1 | 2 |
Wisell v. Jorgensengreen2 sentences1980We have pointed out, however, that “ [o] nee a claim is challenged by motion for summary judgment, accompanied by . . . affidavits or other documentary evidence sufficient to call into question the existence of the factual basis for the claim, the person advancing the claim may not rest upon his mere allegations, but must come forward with an opposing affidavit or other evidence that raises a dispute as to the fact or facts in issue.” Alpstetten Association, Inc. v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 , 408 A.2d 644, 647 (1979); accord, V.R.C.P. 56(e); Wisell v. Jorgensen, 136 Vt. 604, 605 , 398 A.2d 283, 1980We have pointed out, however, that “ [o] nee a claim is challenged by motion for summary judgment, accompanied by . . . affidavits or other documentary evidence sufficient to call into question the existence of the factual basis for the claim, the person advancing the claim may not rest upon his mere allegations, but must come forward with an opposing affidavit or other evidence that raises a dispute as to the fact or facts in issue.” Alpstetten Association, Inc. v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 , 408 A.2d 644, 647 (1979); accord, V.R.C.P. 56(e); Wisell v. Jorgensen, 136 Vt. 604, 605 , 398 A.2d 283, | 1 | 2 |
Webb v. LeClairgreen1 sentence2026As the Vermont Supreme Court has long held, when a moving party challenges the factual basis of a claim by affidavit or other documentary evidence, then the non-moving party “may not rest upon his mere allegations, but must come forward with an opposing affidavit or other evidence that raises a dispute as to the fact or facts in issue.” Alpstetten Ass’n v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 (1979); see also Webb v. Leclair, 2007 VT 65, ¶ 14 (reaffirming this standard). | 1 | 1 |
Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. v. Ace American Insurance Companygreen1 sentence2026Nevertheless, the purpose of the notice pleading standard is “‘not to keep litigants out of court but rather to keep them in’ so that the merits of the claim may ‘be sorted out during a flexible pretrial process and, as appropriate, through the crucible of trial.’” Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. v. Ace American Insurance Co., 2022 VT 45, ¶45 (quoting Bell Atl. | 1 | 1 |
Whorton v. Bocktinggreen2 sentences2018See Whorton , 549 U.S. at 416 , 127 S.Ct. 1173 (explaining that rule is new if it is inconsistent with prior precedent). ¶ 13. 2018See Whorton , 549 U.S. at 416 , 127 S.Ct. 1173 (explaining that rule is new if it is inconsistent with prior precedent). ¶ 13. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Delgado-Hernandezgreen2 sentences2017The matter is left largely to the discretion of the judge as the circumstances of the case will dictate both the degree and kind of inquiry that is necessary.”); see also In re Stocks, 2014 VT 27, ¶ 15 (recognizing that there is no “particular formula for determining that there is a factual basis for the As the concurrence points out, moreover, the majority’s holding now apparently prohibits the entry of Alford pleas, which, rare as they might be, we have previously accepted and which the U.S. Supreme Court finds constitutionally acceptable. 32 plea”); Whitney, 156 Vt. at 303 , 591 A.2d at 389 2017The matter is left largely to the discretion of the judge, as the circumstances of the case will dictate both the degree and kind of inquiry that is necessary."); see also In re Stocks , 2014 VT 27 , ¶ 15, 196 Vt. 160 , 94 A.3d 1143 (recognizing that there is no "particular formula for determining that there is a factual basis for the plea"); Whitney , 156 Vt. at 303 , 591 A.2d at 389 ("For the Rule 11(f) inquiry, 'no mechanical rules can be stated, and the more complex or doubtful the situation ..., the more searching will be the inquiry dictated by a sound judgment and discretion.' " (citati | 1 | 1 |
McCarthy v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2017See id. at 467 ;12 see also W. 2017See ibr.US_Case_Law.Schema.Case_Body:v1">id . at 467 , 89 S.Ct. 1166 ; 12 see also 5 W. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Whitneygreen2 sentences2017The matter is left largely to the discretion of the judge as the circumstances of the case will dictate both the degree and kind of inquiry that is necessary.”); see also In re Stocks, 2014 VT 27, ¶ 15 (recognizing that there is no “particular formula for determining that there is a factual basis for the As the concurrence points out, moreover, the majority’s holding now apparently prohibits the entry of Alford pleas, which, rare as they might be, we have previously accepted and which the U.S. Supreme Court finds constitutionally acceptable. 32 plea”); Whitney, 156 Vt. at 303 , 591 A.2d at 389 2017The matter is left largely to the discretion of the judge as the circumstances of the case will dictate both the degree and kind of inquiry that is necessary.”); see also In re Stocks, 2014 VT 27, ¶ 15 (recognizing that there is no “particular formula for determining that there is a factual basis for the As the concurrence points out, moreover, the majority’s holding now apparently prohibits the entry of Alford pleas, which, rare as they might be, we have previously accepted and which the U.S. Supreme Court finds constitutionally acceptable. 32 plea”); Whitney, 156 Vt. at 303 , 591 A.2d at 389 | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Merchants Bankgreen1 sentence2015Any delay in filing was minimal and the Court treats Plaintiff’s complaint as properly amended, therefore the Court will address the claims as Plaintiff has framed them in her latest complaint and opposition to summary judgment. 4 into question the existence of the factual basis for the claim.” Miller v. Merchants Bank, 138 Vt. 235, 237 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
Margison v. Spriggsgreen2 sentences1987Alpstetten Association, Inc. v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 , 408 A.2d 644, 647 (1979); see also Margison v. Spriggs, 146 Vt. 116, 119 , 499 A.2d 756, 758 (1985). 1987Alpstetten Association, Inc. v. Kelly, 137 Vt. 508, 514 , 408 A.2d 644, 647 (1979); see also Margison v. Spriggs, 146 Vt. 116, 119 , 499 A.2d 756, 758 (1985). | 1 | 1 |
Raymond v. Raymondgreen2 sentences1978Sanders v. Sanders, 25 Vt. 713 (1853); Hemenway v. Hemenway, 65 Vt. 623 , 27 A. 609 (1893) ; Raymond v. Raymond, 120 Vt. 87, 91 , 132 A.2d 427, 429-30 (1957). 1978Sanders v. Sanders, 25 Vt. 713 (1853); Hemenway v. Hemenway, 65 Vt. 623 , 27 A. 609 (1893) ; Raymond v. Raymond, 120 Vt. 87, 91 , 132 A.2d 427, 429-30 (1957). | 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. Peck
green
2 sentences2018Rule 11(b) allows a defendant to plead no-contest or "nolo contendere," but "only with the consent of the court." Rule 11(f) is not applicable in cases where a defendant pleads nolo contendere because it states that the factual basis requirement is required prior to accepting "a plea of guilty." See Reporter's Notes, V.R.Cr.P. 11 (stating that its "requirement of a factual inquiry does not apply to pleas of nolo contendere"); State v. Peck , 149 Vt. 617 , 622, 547 A.2d 1329 , 1332 (1988) (recognizing that "a nolo contendere plea does not require a factual inquiry"). 2018Rule 11(b) allows a defendant to plead no-contest or "nolo contendere," but "only with the consent of the court." Rule 11(f) is not applicable in cases where a defendant pleads nolo contendere because it states that the factual basis requirement is required prior to accepting "a plea of guilty." See Reporter's Notes, V.R.Cr.P. 11 (stating that its "requirement of a factual inquiry does not apply to pleas of nolo contendere"); State v. Peck , 149 Vt. 617 , 622, 547 A.2d 1329 , 1332 (1988) (recognizing that "a nolo contendere plea does not require a factual inquiry"). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In re P.M.
green
1 sentence2017The matter is left largely to the discretion of the judge, as the circumstances of the case will dictate both the degree and kind of inquiry that is necessary."); see also In re Stocks , 2014 VT 27 , ¶ 15, 196 Vt. 160 , 94 A.3d 1143 (recognizing that there is no "particular formula for determining that there is a factual basis for the plea"); Whitney , 156 Vt. at 303 , 591 A.2d at 389 ("For the Rule 11(f) inquiry, 'no mechanical rules can be stated, and the more complex or doubtful the situation ..., the more searching will be the inquiry dictated by a sound judgment and discretion.' " (citati | 1 | 2017–2017 |
In Re Jones
green
2 sentences2015She raised three issues in her *108 petition: (1) the three-year statute of limitations governing aiding in the commission of a sexual assault had expired, see In re Janes, 2009 VT 113, ¶ 9 , 187 Vt. 1 , 989 A.2d 482 ; (2) she was denied effective assistance of counsel when her attorney failed to raise the statute-of-limitations defense; and (3) the court failed to establish a factual basis for the claim, and therefore, her plea was not voluntary. 2015She raised three issues in her *108 petition: (1) the three-year statute of limitations governing aiding in the commission of a sexual assault had expired, see In re Janes, 2009 VT 113, ¶ 9 , 187 Vt. 1 , 989 A.2d 482 ; (2) she was denied effective assistance of counsel when her attorney failed to raise the statute-of-limitations defense; and (3) the court failed to establish a factual basis for the claim, and therefore, her plea was not voluntary. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Sanders v. Sanders
neutral
1 sentence1978Sanders v. Sanders, 25 Vt. 713 (1853); Hemenway v. Hemenway, 65 Vt. 623 , 27 A. 609 (1893) ; Raymond v. Raymond, 120 Vt. 87, 91 , 132 A.2d 427, 429-30 (1957). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Hemenway v. Hemenway
neutral
1 sentence1978Sanders v. Sanders, 25 Vt. 713 (1853); Hemenway v. Hemenway, 65 Vt. 623 , 27 A. 609 (1893) ; Raymond v. Raymond, 120 Vt. 87, 91 , 132 A.2d 427, 429-30 (1957). | 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.