Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27, § 612 (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 : MARKETABLE RECORD TITLE

(Cite as: 27 V.S.A. § 612)

§ 612. Municipal permits

(a) Notwithstanding the majority decision in Bianchi v. Lorenz (1997), for land development, as defined in 24 V.S.A. § 4303(10), no encumbrance on record title to real estate or effect on marketability shall be created by the failure to obtain or comply with the terms or conditions of any required municipal land use permit as defined in 24 V.S.A. § 4303(11).

(b) A purchaser shall have the right to terminate a binding contract for the sale of real estate if, prior to closing, the purchaser determines and gives written notice to the seller that land development has occurred on the real estate without a required municipal land use permit or in violation of an existing municipal land use permit. Following the receipt of written notice, the seller shall have 30 days, unless the parties agree to a shorter or longer period, either to obtain the required municipal land use permits or to comply with existing municipal land use permits. If the seller does not obtain the required municipal land use permits or comply with existing municipal land use permits, the purchaser may terminate the contract if, as an owner or occupant of the real estate, the purchaser may be subject to an enforcement action under 24 V.S.A. § 4454. (Added 1997, No. 125 (Adj. Sess.), § 5, eff. April 27, 1998; amended 1999, No. 46, § 8, eff. May 26, 1999; 2009, No. 93 (Adj. Sess.), § 4; 2011, No. 102 (Adj. Sess.), § 5, eff. May 5, 2012.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 2000–2016 · leading case: Kremer v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 2004 VT 91 (Vt. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kremer v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 2004 VT 91 (Vt. 2004). · cites it 2× “As an initial matter, the significance of our ruling in this case is likely limited as the Legislature has declared, subsequent to the facts giving rise to this case, that no encumbrance on title results from failure to obtain a municipal land use permit, see 27 V.S.A. § 612(a),…”

Clayton v. Clayton Investments, Inc., 929 A.2d 713 (Vt. 2007). “2d 1037, 1039 (1997), superseded by statute, 27 V.S.A. § 612, as recognized in New Eng.”

New England Fed. Credit Union v. Stewart Title Guarantee Co., 765 A.2d 450 (Vt. 2000). “” 27 VS.A. § 612. The meaning and effect of this legislation is not before us.”

Hinesburg Hannaford SD Revision (Vt. Super. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “125, codified at 27 V.S.A. § 612(a). Thus, Aubuchon Realty Company, Inc.”

Purvis Nonconforming Use (Vt. Super. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “§ 2, codified at 27 V.S.A. § 612(a) (“Notwithstanding the majority decision in Bianchi v.”

— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27, § 612(a) — 3 cases

Kremer v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 2004 VT 91 (Vt. 2004). “As an initial matter, the significance of our ruling in this case is likely limited as the Legislature has declared, subsequent to the facts giving rise to this case, that no encumbrance on title results from failure to obtain a municipal land use permit, see 27 V.S.A. § 612(a),…”

Hinesburg Hannaford SD Revision (Vt. Super. Ct. 2016). “125, codified at 27 V.S.A. § 612(a). Thus, Aubuchon Realty Company, Inc.”

Purvis Nonconforming Use (Vt. Super. Ct. 2016). “§ 2, codified at 27 V.S.A. § 612(a) (“Notwithstanding the majority decision in Bianchi v.”

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.