8 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Stowe Club Highlandsgreen2 sentences2024Act 250 Rule 34(E) codifies the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis set forth in In re Stowe Club Highlands. 166 Vt. 33 , 38—40 (1996); Act 250 Rules, Rule 34(E). 2018Rule 34(E) Act 250 Rule 34(E) codifies the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in In re Stowe Clubs Highlands, which may preclude an applicant from amending conditions in a final and binding Act 250 land use permit. 166 Vt. 33, 38-40 (1996); Act 250 Rules, Rule 34(E). | 1 | 3 |
In Re Maple Tree Placegreen1 sentence2019Rule 5(i) is consistent with the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in In re Maple Tree Place, in that the Court goes “beyond its role as an appellate tribunal, even under a de novo review standard, to start addressing new issues never presented to the [municipal panel] and on which interested persons have not spoken in the local process.” 156 Vt. 494, 500 (1991). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lamay v. State
green
1 sentence2026Second, the jury would then have to infer that this connection was intended as a negative association and that “end of career” effectively meant “too old to hire, regardless of her qualifications.” In this respect, the Court is guided by the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in Lamay v. State, 2012 VT 49, ¶ 10 , 193 Vt. 635 (mem.). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Jennifer Weinstein v. Jeanmarie Leonard and Carol Sayour v. Lloyd J. Weinstein and The Weinstein Group, P.C.
green
2 sentences2020Our interpretation is guided by the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in Weinstein v. Leonard, which applied the principles set forth in Colgan v. Agway, Inc. See generally Weinstein v. Leonard, 2015 VT 136, ¶ 11 , 200 Vt. 615 ; Colgan v. Agway Inc., 150 Vt. 373 (1988). 2020Our interpretation is guided by the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in Weinstein v. Leonard, which applied the principles set forth in Colgan v. Agway, Inc. See generally Weinstein v. Leonard, 2015 VT 136, ¶ 11 , 200 Vt. 615 ; Colgan v. Agway Inc., 150 Vt. 373 (1988). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Colgan v. Agway, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020Our interpretation is guided by the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis in Weinstein v. Leonard, which applied the principles set forth in Colgan v. Agway, Inc. See generally Weinstein v. Leonard, 2015 VT 136, ¶ 11 , 200 Vt. 615 ; Colgan v. Agway Inc., 150 Vt. 373 (1988). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
In Re Appeal of JAM Golf, LLC
green
1 sentence2009Even without analyzing whether any of the Plan provisions are enforceable or are unduly vague under the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis of this Plan in In re Appeal of JAM Golf, LLC, 2008 VT 110 , ¶¶ 15–19, the proposed project is consistent with the Plan’s stated land use policies, goals and objectives. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Sweet v. Roy
green
1 sentence2004This contention would seem to be disputed by the Vermont Supreme Court’s analysis of a similar situation in Sweet v. Roy. 173 Vt. 418 , 429–30 (2002). | 1 | 2004–2004 |