State v. Ross, 290 A.2d 38 (Vt. 1972). · cites it 2דSince that case was decided the necessity for formal exceptions was abolished in 1959 upon the passage by the legislature of 12 V.S.A. § 2381, now (since July 1,1971) V.”
West-Nesbitt, Inc. v. Randall, 236 A.2d 676 (Vt. 1967). · cites it 2ד"Q And the company told you it had been accepted for that? A Yes" While the transcript fails to reveal an objection to the last question it is apparent from the above testimony, and objections made thereto, that defendants' attorney had sufficiently made known to the trial court…”
State v. Murray, 186 A.2d 193 (Vt. 1962). · cites it 2דIn 1959 the legislature passed what is now 12 V.S.A. §2381. As it states, the purpose of this section is to eliminate the necessity for formal exceptions.”
L'ECUYER v. State High. Bd., 207 A.2d 260 (Vt. 1965). · cites it 2דDefendant contends it then took a timely objection and claims this objection extended to the entire line of the testimony just quoted as provided by 12 V.S.A. §2381. This statute provides that formal exceptions are no longer required under present court procedure to preserve a…”
Pond v. Carter, 229 A.2d 248 (Vt. 1967). “” Although the taking of formal exceptions to the rulings or orders of court is eliminated by 12 V.S.A. §2381, it does not override *311 the rule laid down in State v.”
Lafko v. Lafko, 256 A.2d 166 (Vt. 1969). “To properly preserve a question for appellate review, the objector, or moving party, as the case may be, should affirmatively *612 demonstrate in the record that his position and the action which he desired the trier to take was made known to the court.”
Latourneau v. Citizens Utils. Co., 209 A.2d 307 (Vt. 1965). “Citizens has taken its appeal here under the provisions of 12 V.S.A. §§2381 - 2385 from certain Findings of Fact as well as the Order and the Amended Order to this Court.”
Merrill v. Reed, 185 A.2d 737 (Vt. 1962). “2d 530 ; 12 V.S.A. §2381. Also see State v. Wood, 121 Vt.”
Vermont Woolen Corp. v. Wackerman, 167 A.2d 533 (Vt. 1961). “Although no objection was made at the hearing to the taking of testimony from witnesses who were not under oath, the plaintiff complains of it here by a passing reference in its brief.”
Couture v. Lowery, 168 A.2d 295 (Vt. 1961). “12 V.S.A. §2381. The position and claim of the defendants was acknowledged by the chancellor during the hearing who took the view that the statute did not apply to an auction of real estate, and a decree for the plaintiff was entered accordingly.”
Abbadessa v. Tegu, 173 A.2d 153 (Vt. 1961). “12 V.S.A. §2381. It is to be expected that the irritations and frustrations experienced by court and counsel alike should occasionally erupt in some unpredictable manner.”
State v. Skagen, 167 A.2d 530 (Vt. 1961). “2d 827 ; 12 V.S.A. §2381. Furthermore, the motion made below does not confine itself to requesting statements made by the witness then on the stand.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.