Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 19, § 775 (2026)

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

Subchapter 007 : DISCONTINUANCE OF HIGHWAYS

(Cite as: 19 V.S.A. § 775)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2002–2013 · leading case: Amaliksen v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 167 (Fed. Cl. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Amaliksen v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 167 (Fed. Cl. 2003). · cites it 2× “19 V.S.A. section 775 (2002). See also Dessu-reau v.”
Demarest v. Town of Underhill, 87 A.3d 439 (Vt. 2013). “19 V.S.A. § 775. We have addressed the arguments as framed.”
In Re Doolittle Mountain Lots, Inc., 2007 VT 104 (Vt. 2007). “Thus, if the effect of the road discontinuance has been to restore the property under the road to the ownership of the adjoining lands, petitioner seeks to have a utility line run over those lands without proper condemnation and compensation.”
Demarest & Moulton v. Town of Underhill, 195 Vt. 204 (Vt. 2013). “[2] The superior court subsequently denied the Town’s motion for summary judgment in the maintenance case and instructed the County Road Commissioners to prepare a report pursuant to 19 V.”
Amaliksen v. United States, 53 Fed. Cl. 63 (Fed. Cl. 2002). · cites it 2× “19 V.S.A. section 775 (2002). See also Dessureau v.”
In re Doolittle Mountain Lots, Inc., 938 A.2d 1230 (Vt. 2007). “Thus, if the effect of the road discontinuance has been to restore the property under the road to the ownership of the adjoining lands, petitioner seeks to have a utility line run over those lands without proper condemnation and compensation.”
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.