Village of Northfield v. CHITTENDEN TRUST COMPANY

260 A.2d 406, 128 Vt. 240, 1969 Vt. LEXIS 232
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedDecember 2, 1969
Docket129-69
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 260 A.2d 406 (Village of Northfield v. CHITTENDEN TRUST COMPANY) 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
Village of Northfield v. CHITTENDEN TRUST COMPANY, 260 A.2d 406, 128 Vt. 240, 1969 Vt. LEXIS 232 (Vt. 1969).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The timely filing, in the appropriate .place, of an instrument that adequately gives notice , of the 'intention to appeal from a final ruling, gives this Court appellate jurisdiction. 12 V.S.A. sec. 2382. 12 V.S.A. sec. 2383 requires that the filing be done within thirty days of the date of entry of the order appealed from. It does contain an exception, not involved here, by way of an extension of time in cases where the clerk fails to give notice of the entry of judgment for longer than a week. No other exception is provided for. Failure to file a notice of appeal within the period specified by -this statute puts an end to this Court’s authority to grant ‘review under its provisions. State v. Brown, 121 Vt. 459, 466, 160 A.2d 879.

*242 The appellees, by their motion, claim that this appeal must be dismissed because the appellants did not file their notice of appeal within the time prescribed. The judgment in this case was filed on September 5, 1969, with notice reaching appellants September 8. The notice of appeal was filed October 9, 1969. This was too late to preserve the appellate jurisdiction of this Court. Rice Lumber Co. v. Baslow, 123 Vt. 443, 445, 194 A.2d 65.

The appellants urge that their objections to the findings, filed under Chancery Rule 40, should have operated to stay the entry of judgment. Since the findings and judgment were filed simultaneously, that result could be accomplished only by prevailing on the chancellor to strike the entry of judgment. No such relief was requested. So long as the judgment entry stood, the time requirement of 12 V.S.A. sec. 2383 applied. The right to appeal under it depended upon compliance with its terms. Badger v. Rice, 124 Vt. 82, 85, 196 A.2d 503.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

In Re Bushnell
273 B.R. 359 (D. Vermont, 2001)
LD & MD, Inc. v. State
576 A.2d 1244 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1990)
O'Brien v. Town of Weathersfield Zoning Board
415 A.2d 1060 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1980)
Amodeo v. Town of Readsboro
401 A.2d 902 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1979)
Harvey v. Town of Waitsfield
401 A.2d 900 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1979)
Shortle v. Board of Zoning Adjustment
388 A.2d 430 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1978)
McGarigle v. Kenneth Murray & HKR, Inc.
365 A.2d 978 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
260 A.2d 406, 128 Vt. 240, 1969 Vt. LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/village-of-northfield-v-chittenden-trust-company-vt-1969.