last clear chance doctrine (Vermont) · Go Syfert
← Vermont issues

last clear chance doctrine in Vermont

9 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1915–1980 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Lachance, Admr. v. Myersgreen
· 1925 · cited in 3 Vermont opinions naming this issue, 1970–1980
2 sentences

1970A statement of the last clear chance doctrine appears in Lachance, Admr. v. Myers, 98 Vt. 498, 505 , 129 A. 172, 174 (1925), where it is said that “it presupposes a perilous situation, created or existing through negligence of both plaintiff and defendant, but assumes that there was a time after such negligence has occurred when the defendant could, and the plaintiff could not, by the use of the means available, avert the accident.

1970A statement of the last clear chance doctrine appears in Lachance, Admr. v. Myers, 98 Vt. 498, 505 , 129 A. 172, 174 (1925), where it is said that “it presupposes a perilous situation, created or existing through negligence of both plaintiff and defendant, but assumes that there was a time after such negligence has occurred when the defendant could, and the plaintiff could not, by the use of the means available, avert the accident.

23
Wright v. Nasalgreen
vt · 1970 · cited in 1 Vermont opinions naming this issue, 1971–1971
2 sentences

1971In such case, the negligence of the parties creating the situation is regarded as remote and that of the defendant in not averting the accident, after the peril is or should have been discovered, becomes the sole proximate cause of the injury.” Lachance, Admr. v. Myers, 98 Vt. 498, 505 , 129 A. 172 (1925), quoted with approval in Wright v. Nasal, 129 Vt. 66 , 271 A.2d 833, 834 (1970).

1971In such case, the negligence of the parties creating the situation is regarded as remote and that of the defendant in not averting the accident, after the peril is or should have been discovered, becomes the sole proximate cause of the injury.” Lachance, Admr. v. Myers, 98 Vt. 498, 505 , 129 A. 172 (1925), quoted with approval in Wright v. Nasal, 129 Vt. 66 , 271 A.2d 833, 834 (1970).

11
Wellman v. Meadgreen
vt · 1919 · cited in 1 Vermont opinions naming this issue, 1937–1937
2 sentences

1937Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd, 103 Vt. 392, 402 , 154 Atl. 680 ; Wellman, Admr. v. Mead, 93 Vt. 322, 337, 338 , 107 Atl. 396 .

1937Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd, 103 Vt. 392, 402 , 154 Atl. 680 ; Wellman, Admr. v. Mead, 93 Vt. 322, 337, 338 , 107 Atl. 396 .

11
Goodwin, Admx. v. Gastongreen
vt · 1931 · cited in 1 Vermont opinions naming this issue, 1934–1934
2 sentences

1934Goodwin, Admx. v. Gaston et al., 103 Vt. 357, 366, 367 , 154 Atl. 772 . *492 All the testimony as to the speed of the train came from defendant’s trainmen called as witnesses by the plaintiff.

1934Goodwin, Admx. v. Gaston et al., 103 Vt. 357, 366, 367 , 154 Atl. 772 . *492 All the testimony as to the speed of the train came from defendant’s trainmen called as witnesses by the plaintiff.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Sargent v. Interstate Bakeries, Inc. green
illappct · 1967
1 sentence

1975Sargent v. International Bakeries, Inc., 86 Ill.

11975–1975
Starr's Transportation, Inc. v. St. Johnsbury & Lamoille County Railroad green
vt · 1963
2 sentences

1971Johnsbury and Lamoille County Railroad, 123 Vt. 376, 381 , 189 A.2d 525 (1963).

1971Johnsbury and Lamoille County Railroad, 123 Vt. 376, 381 , 189 A.2d 525 (1963).

11971–1971
Bunnell v. McGregor neutral
vt · 1928
2 sentences

1971Bunnell v. McGregor, 101 Vt. 379, 380-81 , 143 A. 643 (1928).

1971Bunnell v. McGregor, 101 Vt. 379, 380-81 , 143 A. 643 (1928).

11971–1971
Spencer v. Fondry neutral
vt · 1960
2 sentences

1970The plaintiff places substantial reliance on Spencer v. Fondry, 122 Vt. 149 , 167 A.2d 372 (1960), in support of his claim that the jury should have been allowed to decide whether the last clear chance doctrine was applicable on the facts in the case.

1970The plaintiff places substantial reliance on Spencer v. Fondry, 122 Vt. 149 , 167 A.2d 372 (1960), in support of his claim that the jury should have been allowed to decide whether the last clear chance doctrine was applicable on the facts in the case.

11970–1970
Fabian v. Barrett Insurance Agency, Inc. neutral
vt · 1954
2 sentences

1970Fabian v. Barrett, 118 Vt. 267, 269 , 108 A.2d 256 (1954).

1970Fabian v. Barrett, 118 Vt. 267, 269 , 108 A.2d 256 (1954).

11970–1970
Watterlund v. Billings green
vt · 1942
1 sentence

1944This test is to be applied to the first count in the declaration based on negligence on the part of the defendant and due care by the plaintiff, Waterlund v. Billings, 112 Vt 256, 264, 23 A2d 540 , and to the second count predicated on the last clear chance doctrine.

11944–1944
Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd Et Ux. green
vt · 1931
2 sentences

1937Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd, 103 Vt. 392, 402 , 154 Atl. 680 ; Wellman, Admr. v. Mead, 93 Vt. 322, 337, 338 , 107 Atl. 396 .

1937Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd, 103 Vt. 392, 402 , 154 Atl. 680 ; Wellman, Admr. v. Mead, 93 Vt. 322, 337, 338 , 107 Atl. 396 .

11937–1937
Trow v. Vermont Central Railroad neutral
vt · 1852
1 sentence

1921Co., 24 Vt. 487 , 58 A. D. 191. [2, 3] The doctrine of the last clear chance may be stated thus: When the negligence of the defendant is proximate, and that of the plaintiff is remote, an action can be sustained.

11921–1921
Harrington v. Rutland Railroad green
vt · 1915
2 sentences

1921Harrington v. Rutland Railroad co., 89 Vt. 112 , 94 Atl. 431 ; Flint’s Admr. v. Central Vermont Ry.

1921Harrington v. Rutland Railroad co., 89 Vt. 112 , 94 Atl. 431 ; Flint’s Admr. v. Central Vermont Ry.

11921–1921
Seviour's Admr. v. Rutland Railroad green
vt · 1914
2 sentences

1915Co., 88 Vt. 107 , 91 Atl. 1039 , it was held that there was no evidence calling for a consideration of the doctrine of the last clear chance.

1915Co., 88 Vt. 107 , 91 Atl. 1039 , it was held that there was no evidence calling for a consideration of the doctrine of the last clear chance.

11915–1915

Where else courts name it

LA 211 (1911–2024) CA 198 (1913–2013) NC 88 (1900–2024) KY 72 (1929–1985) WA 67 (1908–1975) FL 52 (1937–2013) VA 50 (1911–2018) MD 47 (1921–2013) IN 45 (1906–2020) GA 39 (1947–2012) NE 32 (1934–2000) CT 28 (1919–1978) AZ 28 (1946–2001) IA 26 (1916–1994) KS 26 (1911–1976) WV 24 (1928–2001) MI 23 (1929–1995) NY 22 (1930–1997) ID 20 (1928–1990) OK 19 (1908–1978) DC 19 (1953–2016) CO 17 (1914–1973) TN 16 (1925–2017) SC 15 (1951–2006) MO 14 (1906–2002) NM 13 (1937–1993) MT 13 (1919–1996) UT 12 (1919–1971) WY 11 (1939–1985) OR 10 (1914–1972) DE 9 (1938–2018) VT 9 (1915–1980) AR 7 (1933–1961) SD 7 (1941–1983) OH 7 (1919–2011) TX 7 (1944–2016) NV 6 (1915–1979) MA 6 (1939–1992) ME 5 (1939–1976) RI 5 (1937–1993) NJ 4 (1955–1985) HI 4 (1926–2011) IL 3 (1966–1987) AL 3 (1938–1994) ND 3 (1936–1973) MS 3 (1934–1962) NH 2 (1963–1970) PR 2 (1931–1948)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check