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.
8 Vermont opinions name it 2 courts 1964–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Montgomery v. Devoidgreen2 sentences2026See Montgomery, 2006 VT 127, ¶ 12 , 181 Vt. 154 . 4 Because the court has determined that plaintiffs’ conduct amounted to a trespass, the court concludes that defendant’s nuisance counterclaim fails to support any additional award of damages. 2024Therefore, the conversion claim can only be construed against the State Defendants. “‘To establish a claim for conversion, the owner of property must show only that another has appropriated the property to that party’s own use and beneficial enjoyment, has exercised dominion over it in exclusion and defiance of the owner’s right, or has withheld possession from the owner under a claim of title inconsistent with the owner’s title.’” Montgomery, 2006 VT 127, ¶ 12 (quoting P.F. | 2 | 3 |
P.F. Jurgs & Co. v. O'Briengreen2 sentences2024Jurgs & Co. v. O’Brien, 160 Vt. 294, 299 (1993)). 2021Jurgs & Co. v. O’Brien, 160 Vt. 294, 299 , 629 A.2d 325, 328 (1993). | 2 | 2 |
Morgan v. Kroupagreen2 sentences2004First, they assert that the trial court erred when it relied on Morgan v. Kroupa to characterize Paka as a pet and thus not subject to a conversion claim. 167 Vt. 99, 103-05 , 702 A.2d 630, 633-34 (1997). 2004First, they assert that the trial court erred when it relied on Morgan v. Kroupa to characterize Paka as a pet and thus not subject to a conversion claim. 167 Vt. 99, 103-05 , 702 A.2d 630, 633-34 (1997). | 1 | 1 |
United States Sporting Products, Inc. v. Johnny Stewart Game Calls, Inc.green1 sentence2002See United States Sporting Prods., 865 S.W.2d at 218 (rejecting contention that misappropriation must be of a trade secret or confidential information). 4 Nor does the mere availability of a conversion claim preclude assertion of a claim for unfair competition/misappropriation. | 1 | 1 |
Konrad v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.green2 sentences1964See Konrad v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 11 Ill. 1964See Konrad v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 11 Ill.App.2d 503 , 137 N.E.2d 855 , beginning on page 861, for a discussion of these rules. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
O'Bryan Const. Co., Inc. v. Boise Cascade Corp.
green
2 sentences1984The defendant cites O’Bryan Construction Co. v. Boise Cascade Corp., 139 Vt. 81 , 424 A.2d 244 (1980), for the proposition that the plaintiff is entitled to recover only nominal damages for the value of the paper on which the plaintiff’s plans were drawn. 1984The defendant cites O’Bryan Construction Co. v. Boise Cascade Corp., 139 Vt. 81 , 424 A.2d 244 (1980), for the proposition that the plaintiff is entitled to recover only nominal damages for the value of the paper on which the plaintiff’s plans were drawn. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.