Kingsbury v. Villeneuve

475 A.2d 241, 144 Vt. 648, 1984 Vt. LEXIS 467
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedMarch 19, 1984
DocketNo. 82-326
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 475 A.2d 241 (Kingsbury v. Villeneuve) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kingsbury v. Villeneuve, 475 A.2d 241, 144 Vt. 648, 1984 Vt. LEXIS 467 (Vt. 1984).

Opinion

Where a contract

is governed by the Statute of Frauds, in this case 12.. V.S.A. § 181(5), “any changes made are subjected to the same requirements of form as the original provisions.” Evarts v. Forte, 135 Vt. 306, 311, 376 A.2d 766, 769 (1977). Defendants’ oral modification of the written contract is therefore unenforceable, and the judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Prue v. Royer, Sr., and Department of Liquor Control
2013 VT 12 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
475 A.2d 241, 144 Vt. 648, 1984 Vt. LEXIS 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kingsbury-v-villeneuve-vt-1984.