Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 32, § 3756 (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 : AGRICULTURAL LAND AND MANAGED FORESTLAND USE VALUE APPRAISAL PROGRAM

(Cite as: 32 V.S.A. § 3756)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: Town of Victory v. State, 814 A.2d 369 (Vt. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Town of Victory v. State, 814 A.2d 369 (Vt. 2002). “Furthermore, 32 V.S.A. § 3756(i) mandates that the director “shall” remove from the current use program any parcel for which a conformance report is not received.”
Mollica v. Div. of Prop. Valuation & Review, 2008 VT 60 (Vt. 2008). “2d 395, 403 (2001) (noting this Court’s rule that “the interpretation of a statute by the administrative body responsible for its execution will be sustained on appeal absent compelling indication of error” (quotation omitted)). In this case, the applicable statute provides that…”
William Fulton & Mary Fulton v. Dep't of Forests, Parks, & Rec., 2024 VT 56 (Vt. 2024). · cites it 2× “See 32 V.S.A. § 3756(e) (requiring new owner of enrolled property who wishes to continue enrollment to indicate as much on property-transfer tax return at time of transfer).”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 32, § 3756(e) — 1 case
William Fulton & Mary Fulton v. Dep't of Forests, Parks, & Rec., 2024 VT 56 (Vt. 2024). “See 32 V.S.A. § 3756(e) (requiring new owner of enrolled property who wishes to continue enrollment to indicate as much on property-transfer tax return at time of transfer).”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 32, § 3756(f) — 1 case
Mollica v. Div. of Prop. Valuation & Review, 2008 VT 60 (Vt. 2008). “2d 395, 403 (2001) (noting this Court’s rule that “the interpretation of a statute by the administrative body responsible for its execution will be sustained on appeal absent compelling indication of error” (quotation omitted)). In this case, the applicable statute provides that…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 32, § 3756(i) — 1 case
Town of Victory v. State, 814 A.2d 369 (Vt. 2002). “Furthermore, 32 V.S.A. § 3756(i) mandates that the director “shall” remove from the current use program any parcel for which a conformance report is not received.”
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.