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 1978–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Orengreen2 sentences2025See Paige, 2017 VT 54, ¶ 6 (recognizing that courts lack constitutional authority to render advisory opinions). 2 The senators asserted below that Ms. Saunders “cannot claim the safe haven of the de facto officer rule.” “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” State v. Oren, 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (citati 2025See Paige, 2017 VT 54, ¶ 6 (recognizing that courts lack constitutional authority to render advisory opinions). 2 The senators asserted below that Ms. Saunders “cannot claim the safe haven of the de facto officer rule.” “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” State v. Oren, 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (citati | 3 | 3 |
In Re GVgreen2 sentences2013As stated in State v. Oren: “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (quoting In re G.V., 136 Vt. 499, 501-02 , 394 A.2d 1126, 1127 (1978)). ¶ 7. 2013He argues that this disqualification is unlike the defects seen in other cases where this Court has applied the de facto officer doctrine to mistakes like a scrivener’s error as in Oren, 160 Vt. at 248 , 627 A.2d at 339 (upholding de facto authority where a deputy sheriff’s appointment ran out due to a “typographical error in the expiration date”), and State v. Mitchell, 142 Vt. 517, 519 , 458 A.2d 1089, 1090 (1983) (applying de facto doctrine to a deputy sheriff whose certificate of training read “attendance” instead of the statutorily required “completion”), or a filing oversight as in In re | 3 | 3 |
State v. Curtisgreen2 sentences2013See State v. Curtis, 157 Vt. 275, 277 , 597 A.2d 770, 772 (1991) (“Under longstanding practice and precedent, we must not consider constitutional questions unless the disposition of the case requires it.”). 2013See State v. Curtis, 157 Vt. 275, 277 , 597 A.2d 770, 772 (1991) (“Under longstanding practice and precedent, we must not consider constitutional questions unless the disposition of the case requires it.”). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Mitchellgreen2 sentences2013He argues that this disqualification is unlike the defects seen in other cases where this Court has applied the de facto officer doctrine to mistakes like a scrivener’s error as in Oren, 160 Vt. at 248 , 627 A.2d at 339 (upholding de facto authority where a deputy sheriff’s appointment ran out due to a “typographical error in the expiration date”), and State v. Mitchell, 142 Vt. 517, 519 , 458 A.2d 1089, 1090 (1983) (applying de facto doctrine to a deputy sheriff whose certificate of training read “attendance” instead of the statutorily required “completion”), or a filing oversight as in In re 2013He argues that this disqualification is unlike the defects seen in other cases where this Court has applied the de facto officer doctrine to mistakes like a scrivener’s error as in Oren, 160 Vt. at 248 , 627 A.2d at 339 (upholding de facto authority where a deputy sheriff’s appointment ran out due to a “typographical error in the expiration date”), and State v. Mitchell, 142 Vt. 517, 519 , 458 A.2d 1089, 1090 (1983) (applying de facto doctrine to a deputy sheriff whose certificate of training read “attendance” instead of the statutorily required “completion”), or a filing oversight as in In re | 2 | 2 |
H. Brooke Paige v. State of Vermont, Secretary of State James Condos, Attorney General William Sorrell, Rafael Edward Cruz and Marco Antonio Rubiogreen2 sentences2025See Paige, 2017 VT 54, ¶ 6 (recognizing that courts lack constitutional authority to render advisory opinions). 2 The senators asserted below that Ms. Saunders “cannot claim the safe haven of the de facto officer rule.” “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” State v. Oren, 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (citati 2025See Paige, 2017 VT 54, ¶ 6 (recognizing that courts lack constitutional authority to render advisory opinions). 2 The senators asserted below that Ms. Saunders “cannot claim the safe haven of the de facto officer rule.” “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” State v. Oren, 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (citati | 1 | 1 |
Cummings v. Clarkgreen1 sentence2025In other words, the de facto officer rule benefits third parties, and those not duly appointed to an office cannot justify their acts on the ground that they are officers de facto; they must instead “show [their] right to exercise the functions of the office.” Cummings v. Clark, 15 Vt. 653, 657-58 (1843); see also Smith & Son v. MacAulay, 109 Vt. 326, 332 , 196 A. 281, 284 (1938) (“One exercising such an office cannot justify his acts on the ground that he was a de facto officer, in any suit to which he is a party.”). | 1 | 1 |
Smith & Son, Inc. v. Town of Hartfordgreen2 sentences2025In other words, the de facto officer rule benefits third parties, and those not duly appointed to an office cannot justify their acts on the ground that they are officers de facto; they must instead “show [their] right to exercise the functions of the office.” Cummings v. Clark, 15 Vt. 653, 657-58 (1843); see also Smith & Son v. MacAulay, 109 Vt. 326, 332 , 196 A. 281, 284 (1938) (“One exercising such an office cannot justify his acts on the ground that he was a de facto officer, in any suit to which he is a party.”). 2025In other words, the de facto officer rule benefits third parties, and those not duly appointed to an office cannot justify their acts on the ground that they are officers de facto; they must instead “show [their] right to exercise the functions of the office.” Cummings v. Clark, 15 Vt. 653, 657-58 (1843); see also Smith & Son v. MacAulay, 109 Vt. 326, 332 , 196 A. 281, 284 (1938) (“One exercising such an office cannot justify his acts on the ground that he was a de facto officer, in any suit to which he is a party.”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cuomogreen1 sentence2024See State v. Cuomo, 2013 VT 101, ¶ 7 (discussing scrivener’s error in the context of the de facto officer doctrine). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Appeal of Reynoldsgreen1 sentence2009Questions 4, 6, and 7 – Vote on Applicant’s application As of the initial hearing on the application, the Planning Commission/ZBA was a seven-member body composed of the following individuals: Tom Ellis, Karen Bruyn, Virginia Kroitzsh, Jeffrey Sailer, Allen Epstein, Jim Rieger, and Betsy Tonkin.8 A quorum of the seven-member body was therefore four members; a concurrence of four members was also required to take action. 1 V.S.A. § 172; In re Reynolds, 170 Vt. 352, 357 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.green1 sentence1993Equal Employment Opportunity Comm’n v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 504 F. Supp. 241, 260 (N.D. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Fancher v. Stearns
green
2 sentences2025“To prevent the endless confusion and irreparable injuries that would otherwise follow, the doctrine that officers, coming into possession of their offices under the forms of law, and assuming to act under a proper commission, issued by the proper elective or appointing power, are de facto officers, whose acts are binding upon third persons, even though upon quo warranto proceedings their title would be found fatally defective.” Fancher v. Stearns, 61 Vt. 616, 617 , 18 A. 455 , 455 (1889). 2025“To prevent the endless confusion and irreparable injuries that would otherwise follow, the doctrine that officers, coming into possession of their offices under the forms of law, and assuming to act under a proper commission, issued by the proper elective or appointing power, are de facto officers, whose acts are binding upon third persons, even though upon quo warranto proceedings their title would be found fatally defective.” Fancher v. Stearns, 61 Vt. 616, 617 , 18 A. 455 , 455 (1889). | 3 | 1978–2025 |
In re G. V.
green
2 sentences2013As stated in State v. Oren: “Under the de facto officer doctrine, long recognized by this Court, an officer coming into possession of his office under the forms of law and assuming to act under a proper commission is a de facto officer whose acts are binding as to third persons, despite some infirmity in the qualifications of the officer.” 160 Vt. 245, 247 , 627 A.2d 337, 339 (1993) (quoting In re G.V., 136 Vt. 499, 501-02 , 394 A.2d 1126, 1127 (1978)). ¶ 7. 2013He argues that this disqualification is unlike the defects seen in other cases where this Court has applied the de facto officer doctrine to mistakes like a scrivener’s error as in Oren, 160 Vt. at 248 , 627 A.2d at 339 (upholding de facto authority where a deputy sheriff’s appointment ran out due to a “typographical error in the expiration date”), and State v. Mitchell, 142 Vt. 517, 519 , 458 A.2d 1089, 1090 (1983) (applying de facto doctrine to a deputy sheriff whose certificate of training read “attendance” instead of the statutorily required “completion”), or a filing oversight as in In re | 3 | 1993–2013 |
Our Lady of Ephesus House of Prayer, Inc. v. Town of Jamaica
green
2 sentences2013“Our review of questions of law is nondeferential and plenary.” Our Lady of Ephesus House of Prayer, Inc. v. Town of Jamaica, 2005 VT 16, ¶ 10 , 178 Vt. 35 , 869 A.2d 145 . 2013“Our review of questions of law is nondeferential and plenary.” Our Lady of Ephesus House of Prayer, Inc. v. Town of Jamaica, 2005 VT 16, ¶ 10 , 178 Vt. 35 , 869 A.2d 145 . | 2 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Levy
green
2 sentences1978State v. Levy, 113 Vt. 374 , 34 A.2d 370 (1943); Fancher v. Stearns, 61 Vt. 616 , 18 A. 455 (1889). 1978State v. Levy, 113 Vt. 374 , 34 A.2d 370 (1943); Fancher v. Stearns, 61 Vt. 616 , 18 A. 455 (1889). | 2 | 1978–1978 |
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.