Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subchapter 001 : INJURIES TO BUILDINGS AND THEIR APPURTENANCES

(Cite as: 13 V.S.A. § 3701)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 47 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Evans v. Cote, 2014 VT 104 (Vt. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Evans v. Cote, 2014 VT 104 (Vt. 2014). · cites it 7× “4 See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a)-(c) (listing three types of unlawful mischief violations depending on amount of damage caused, including damage exceeding $1000, exceeding $250, and under $250).”
Town of Milton Bd. of Health v. Armand Brisson, 2016 VT 56 (Vt. 2016). · cites it 3× “§ 4458(a)(3) (allowing tenants to recover “damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees” from landlords for failure to remedy habitability issues); 13 V.S.A. § 3701(f) (providing that persons who suffer damages as result of crime of unlawful mischief “may recover those damages…”
State v. Patch, 488 A.2d 755 (Vt. 1985). · cites it 9× “§ 2528, and (2) unlawful mischief, 13 V.S.A. § 3701 (a). The defendant had a trial by jury.”
James LeBlanc, Christine LeBlanc Fortin, David LeBlanc & Herman LeBlanc v. Robert E. Snelgrove, 2015 VT 112 (Vt. 2015). · cites it 6× “13 V.S.A. § 3701. The court instructed the jury that Snelgrove sought damages for the costs of repairing his boathouse, and the jury’s award of compensatory damages to Snelgrove is tantamount to a finding that LeBlanc did damage Snelgrove’s property, so the special verdict form…”
Shahi v. Madden, 2008 VT 25 (Vt. 2008). · cites it 2× “[c]ourt and the ability to pursue their legal rights,” (5) unlawful mischief in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 3701, (6) unlawful removal and/or alteration of boundary stakes in violation of 13 V.”
State v. John R. Lyddy II, 2025 VT 1 (Vt. 2025). · cites it 4× “), § 6 (adopting current version of 13 V.S.A. § 3701); id. § 5 (adopting modern version of 13 V.”
Paul Epsom & Kristine Kelley v. David S. Crandall & Mark Johnson, 2019 VT 74 (Vt. 2019). · cites it 2× “See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a), (f) (defining crime of unlawful mischief as “[a] person who, with intent to damage property, and having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he or she has such a right, does any damage to any property,” and providing for civil…”
O'BRIEN v. Island Corp., 596 A.2d 1295 (Vt. 1991). · cites it 2× “See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(f). While this Court may determine that such a remedy is appropriate in furtherance of the legislative purpose, Restatement (Second) of Torts § 874A (1979), it should be hesitant to do so when it is clear that the Legislature could have done so, knew it…”
In re J.M., 769 A.2d 656 (Vt. 2001). “§ 1023(a)(1), unlawful mischief in violation of 13 V.S.A § 3701(c), disorderly conduct in violation of 13 V.”
State v. May, 367 A.2d 672 (Vt. 1976). · cites it 6× “May appeals from the judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury which found him guilty of violating subsection (b) of 13 V.S.A. § 3701, unlawful, mischief. The issues presented relate to the trial court’s instructions which he claims were prejudicial and require rever-, sal.”
Sweet v. Roy, 801 A.2d 694 (Vt. 2002). “Any person who fails to comply with the Act or conditions, restrictions or limitations contained in a permit faces a fine of up to $1000, or imprisonment for up to six months, or both. 10 V.S.A. § 6205(a). The Act authorizes the State to revoke a park owner’s permit to operate.”
United States v. Jose Ortega, Jesus Mancinas, 94 F.3d 764 (2d Cir. 1996). “Under Vermont law, unlawful mischief, Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701 , deals with intentional damage to property and carries generally more serious penalties than disorderly conduct, id.”
Show all 47 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(A) — 1 case
Simonelli v. Mt. Snow Ltd. (Vt. Super. Ct. 2013).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(a) — 11 cases
State v. John R. Lyddy II, 2025 VT 1 (Vt. 2025). “), § 6 (adopting current version of 13 V.S.A. § 3701); id. § 5 (adopting modern version of 13 V.”
Evans v. Cote, 2014 VT 104 (Vt. 2014). “4 See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a)-(c) (listing three types of unlawful mischief violations depending on amount of damage caused, including damage exceeding $1000, exceeding $250, and under $250).”
Shahi v. Madden, 2008 VT 25 (Vt. 2008). “[c]ourt and the ability to pursue their legal rights,” (5) unlawful mischief in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 3701, (6) unlawful removal and/or alteration of boundary stakes in violation of 13 V.”
State v. Filippo, 772 A.2d 531 (Vt. 2001).
State v. Myers, 2011 VT 43 (Vt. 2011).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(b) — 7 cases
James LeBlanc, Christine LeBlanc Fortin, David LeBlanc & Herman LeBlanc v. Robert E. Snelgrove, 2015 VT 112 (Vt. 2015). “13 V.S.A. § 3701. The court instructed the jury that Snelgrove sought damages for the costs of repairing his boathouse, and the jury’s award of compensatory damages to Snelgrove is tantamount to a finding that LeBlanc did damage Snelgrove’s property, so the special verdict form…”
State v. Verge, 564 A.2d 1353 (Vt. 1989).
State v. May, 367 A.2d 672 (Vt. 1976). “May appeals from the judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury which found him guilty of violating subsection (b) of 13 V.S.A. § 3701, unlawful, mischief. The issues presented relate to the trial court’s instructions which he claims were prejudicial and require rever-, sal.”
In re T.S.S., 121 A.3d 1184 (Vt. 2015).
State v. Mayer, 423 A.2d 492 (Vt. 1980).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(c) — 15 cases
Evans v. Cote, 2014 VT 104 (Vt. 2014). “4 See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a)-(c) (listing three types of unlawful mischief violations depending on amount of damage caused, including damage exceeding $1000, exceeding $250, and under $250).”
State v. Patch, 488 A.2d 755 (Vt. 1985). “§ 2528, and (2) unlawful mischief, 13 V.S.A. § 3701 (a). The defendant had a trial by jury.”
In re J.M., 769 A.2d 656 (Vt. 2001). “§ 1023(a)(1), unlawful mischief in violation of 13 V.S.A § 3701(c), disorderly conduct in violation of 13 V.”
State v. Begins, 514 A.2d 719 (Vt. 1986).
Paul Epsom & Kristine Kelley v. David S. Crandall & Mark Johnson, 2019 VT 74 (Vt. 2019). “See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a), (f) (defining crime of unlawful mischief as “[a] person who, with intent to damage property, and having no right to do so or any reasonable ground to believe that he or she has such a right, does any damage to any property,” and providing for civil…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(e) — 1 case
State v. Patch, 488 A.2d 755 (Vt. 1985). “§ 2528, and (2) unlawful mischief, 13 V.S.A. § 3701 (a). The defendant had a trial by jury.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3701(f) — 6 cases
Town of Milton Bd. of Health v. Armand Brisson, 2016 VT 56 (Vt. 2016). “§ 4458(a)(3) (allowing tenants to recover “damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees” from landlords for failure to remedy habitability issues); 13 V.S.A. § 3701(f) (providing that persons who suffer damages as result of crime of unlawful mischief “may recover those damages…”
James LeBlanc, Christine LeBlanc Fortin, David LeBlanc & Herman LeBlanc v. Robert E. Snelgrove, 2015 VT 112 (Vt. 2015). “13 V.S.A. § 3701. The court instructed the jury that Snelgrove sought damages for the costs of repairing his boathouse, and the jury’s award of compensatory damages to Snelgrove is tantamount to a finding that LeBlanc did damage Snelgrove’s property, so the special verdict form…”
O'BRIEN v. Island Corp., 596 A.2d 1295 (Vt. 1991). “See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(f). While this Court may determine that such a remedy is appropriate in furtherance of the legislative purpose, Restatement (Second) of Torts § 874A (1979), it should be hesitant to do so when it is clear that the Legislature could have done so, knew it…”
Evans v. Cote, 2014 VT 104 (Vt. 2014). “4 See 13 V.S.A. § 3701(a)-(c) (listing three types of unlawful mischief violations depending on amount of damage caused, including damage exceeding $1000, exceeding $250, and under $250).”
Isleib v. Zutell (Vt. Super. Ct. 2012).
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.