Writs in the District Court shall be returnable as ordered by the Supreme Court either
at the principal office or the circuit office of the District Court in the territorial
unit where one of the parties resides, if either party is an inhabitant in the State,
or where the cause of action arose. The place of trial in the District Court shall
be within the territorial unit to which the writ is returnable and as near as possible
to the town where one of the parties resides, giving preference to the plaintiff.
If default occurs, judgment may be rendered at the place where the writ is returnable. (Amended 1967, No. 194, § 14, eff. March 1, 1968; 1967, No. 347 (Adj. Sess.), § 3, eff. March 23, 1968; 1973, No. 249 (Adj. Sess.), § 14, eff. April 9, 1974.)
State v. Fisher, 360 A.2d 102 (Vt. 1976). · cites it 2דIn this connection, defendant assumes that this action concerns real estate and is governed by 12 V.S.A. § 402. This statute deals with county court, now superior court, actions, and such actions must be brought in the county where the land lies.”
Est. of Emilo v. St. Pierre, 505 A.2d 664 (Vt. 1985). “2d 102 (1976); 12 V.S.A. § 405. The court concluded that no issue of title had been raised despite a clear opportunity to do so.”
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.