If a person is out of the State when a cause of action of a personal nature mentioned
in this chapter accrues against him or her, the action may be commenced within the
time limited therefor after such person comes into the State. If a person is absent
from and resides out of the State after a cause of action accrues against him or her
and before the statute has run, and he or she has not known property within the State
which can by common process of law be attached, the time of his or her absence shall
not be taken as a part of the time limited for the commencement of the action. The
provisions of this section shall not extend to a cause of action accruing in another
state or government, when the parties thereto at the time of the accruing of such
cause of action are residents of such other state or government.
Fortier v. Byrnes, 678 A.2d 890 (Vt. 1996). · cites it 9דIn his response, plaintiff argued that the statute was tolled under 12 V.S.A. § 552 3 because defendant had resided out of state during the time between plaintiff’s injury and the date of the complaint.”
Thayer v. Herdt, 586 A.2d 1122 (Vt. 1990). · cites it 3ד§ 892 in 1961 to provide that service on the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles shall not render inoperative the tolling provisions of 12 V.S.A. § 552 — which are virtually identical to those found in 14 V.”
Marine Midland Bank v. Bicknell, 2004 VT 25 (Vt. 2004). · cites it 4דThe court found that § 506 applied and that, contrary to appellant’s assertion, Vermont’s tolling statute, 12 V.S.A. § 552, did not extend to this action because both parties were New York residents when the cause of action accrued.”
Ricker v. Lajoie, 314 F. Supp. 401 (D. Vt. 1970). · cites it 3דThe issue before the Court, is, therefore, whether an automobile insurance policy issued to a non-resident by a company doing business in Vermont is “known property within the state” of Vermont “which can, by common process of law, be attached” within 12 V.”
Martel v. Stafford, 603 A.2d 345 (Vt. 1991). “Based on this fact he argued that the applicable statute of limitations was tolled until that date pursuant to 12 V.S.A. § 552. If we accept that argument, the complaint was untimely by only four and one-half months.”
Andrews v. Stam, 182 Vt. 482 (Vt. 2007). · cites it 2דRather, plaintiff argues that the statute of limitations was tolled by 12 V.S.A. § 552, which provides: If a person is absent from and resides out of the state after a cause of action accrues against him and before the statute has run, and he has not known property within the…”
Andrews v. Stam, 2007 VT 79 (Vt. 2007). “Rather, plaintiff argues that the statute of limitations was tolled by 12 V.S.A. § 552, which provides: *484 If a person is absent from and resides out of the state after a cause of action accrues against him and before the statute has run, and he has not known property within…”
Messier v. Bushman (Vt. Super. Ct. 2017). · cites it 3ד§ 558 Regardless of whether the court should have dismissed rather than having granted judgment on the pleadings, nothing in the record suggests that 12 V.”
messier v. bushman (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024). · cites it 2ד§ 558 Regardless of whether the court should have dismissed rather than having granted judgment on the pleadings, nothing in the record suggests that 12 V.S.A. § 558 applies to this case and Mr. Messier does not explain how it could.”
Cutler v. Travelers Ins., 412 A.2d 284 (Vt. 1980). “Plaintiffs’ claim would be barred but the statute is tolled pursuant to 12 V.S.A. §§ 552, 892(b). Although the court below erred in dismissing the action against the defendant Graveline on the basis of the statute of limitations, the error was harmless.”
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.