Superior Courts within their jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status,
and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. An
action or proceeding shall not be open to objection on the grounds that a declaratory
judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative
in form and effect. Such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment
or decree. (Amended 1971, No. 185 (Adj. Sess.), § 236, eff. March 29, 1972; 1973, No. 193 (Adj. Sess.), § 3, eff. April 9, 1974; 2009, No. 154 (Adj. Sess.), § 81, eff. Feb. 1, 2011.)
Benson v. Hodgdon, 2010 VT 11 (Vt. 2010). · cites it 4דFirst, they argue that the plaintiffs did not prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a public road existed and was located on their land, and thus the trial court erred in so finding. Second, they claim that the Town had abandoned the Road and defendants gained…”
Chase v. State, 2008 VT 107 (Vt. 2008). · cites it 2ד§ 5602, and the Vermont Declaratory Judgment Act, 12 V.S.A. § 4711. Dr. Chase named as defendants the State of Vermont, the Secretary of the Agency of Human Services, the Commissioner of the Department of Health, the Executive Director of the Medical Practice Board, the interim…”
Roy H.A. Watson III v. The Vill. at Northshore I Ass'n, Inc., 184 A.3d 1133 (Vt. 2018). · cites it 2דWe review the court's decisions on the availability of declaratory relief and summary judgment de novo. Summary judgment is appropriate only where there exists no disputed issue of material fact.”
In re Mountain Top Inn & Resort, JO 1-391 (Katherine Hall, Appellant), 2020 VT 57 (Vt. 2020). “§ 807; see also 12 V.S.A. § 4711 (Declaratory Judgment Act) (“Superior Courts within their jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”
Travelers Indem. Co. v. Wallis, 2003 VT 103 (Vt. 2003). · cites it 2ד§ 807, and 12 V.S.A. § 4711. We accept Travelers’s argument that its complaint was not an appeal, but we affirm the dismissal of the company’s challenge to the Commissioner’s actions on primary jurisdiction grounds.”
Negotiations Comm. of Caledonia Cent. Supervisory Union v. Caledonia Cent. Educ. Assn., 184 A.3d 236 (Vt. 2018). · cites it 2דhe trial court incorrectly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the matter at hand; contrary to the court's findings, it had jurisdiction to consider the parties' claims because: (1) the issue was ripe-the parties' positions and interests were concrete,…”
Northfield Sch. Bd. v. Washington South Educ. Ass'n & Paul Clayton, 210 A.3d 460 (Vt. 2019). “§§ 5673 and 5674(b) ; and (2) declaring that Clayton and the Association have no right to proceed to arbitration of the matter in dispute and enjoining the threatened arbitration, pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 12 V.S.A. § 4711. Clayton and the Association filed a…”
Doria v. Univ. of Vermont, 589 A.2d 317 (Vt. 1991). “2d 45, 46 (1974); see 12 V.S.A. § 4711. Unless an actual or justiciable controversy is present, a declaratory judgment is merely an advisory opinion which we lack the constitutional authority to render.”
Price v. Leland, 546 A.2d 793 (Vt. 1988). “See 12 V.S.A. § 4711. IV. Finally, plaintiff argues that the trial court exceeded its authority by taking affirmative action in a declaratory judgment proceeding.”
Bethel v. Mount Anthony Union High Sch. Dist., 795 A.2d 1215 (Vt. 2002). “Appellant, Michael Bethel, sought a declaratory judgment in superior court, brought pursuant to 12 V.S.A. § 4711, to determine the validity of a 1998 amendment to an agreement which established the Mount Anthony Union High School District.”
Vermont State Employees' Ass'n v. Vermont Crim. Just. Training Council, 704 A.2d 769 (Vt. 1997). “There is no statutory provision for review of the Attorney General’s decision whether to certify such contracts. Plaintiffs sought review of the Attorney General’s decision in this case under V.”
Williams v. State, 589 A.2d 840 (Vt. 1990). “To do so would be to ignore the message of 12 V.S.A. § 4711 and our prior holdings that the Act has not enlarged the subject matter jurisdiction of the courts.”
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.