LaFlamme v. Church
This text of 465 A.2d 268 (LaFlamme v. Church) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiff brought this small claims action seeking to collect $500 allegedly owed him from a previous loan made to defendant. At hearing, defendant acknowledged the $500 loan, but insisted that the loan had been paid back in full in the form of cash and small purchases for plaintiff. The parties were the only witnesses at the hearing, and their testimony was completely conflicting. After hearing, the court found for defendant, and plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm.
We have consistently held that “[w]hen the evidence is conflicting the credibility of the witnesses, the weight of the evidence, and its persuasive effect are questions for the trier of fact, and its determination must stand if supported by credible evidence even though there may be inconsistencies or substantial evidence to the contrary.” Concra Corp. v. Andrus, 141 Vt. 169, 173, 446 A.2d 363, 365 (1982) ; Stamato v. Quazzo, 139 Vt. 155, 158, 423 A.2d 1201, 1203 (1980).
Our review of the record reveals sufficient credible evidence to support the judgment of the trial court. Accordingly, it must be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
465 A.2d 268, 143 Vt. 219, 1983 Vt. LEXIS 498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laflamme-v-church-vt-1983.