Legal Opinion

Sachse v. Lumley

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided January 9, 1987No. 85-009PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeck, J.

Defendants appeal a jury verdict from the Rutland Superior Court returning to plaintiffs a disputed deposit of $8,500 made under the terms of a purchase and sales agreement between the parties. We affirm.

Defendants raise two claims of error. First, they argue that the trial court erred in denying defendants’ motions for a directed verdict, for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and for a new trial. Second, they contend the trial court should not have charged the jury on the law of agency.

Plaintiffs, George and Myrna Sachse, residents of New Jersey, were interested in relocating to Vermont.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lent v. HuntoonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1983
  2. Senesac v. Assoc. in Obstetrics & GynecologySupreme Court of Vermont · 1982
  3. Dartmouth Savings Bank v. F.O.S. AssociatesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1984
  4. Brown v. PiliniSupreme Court of Vermont · 1970
  5. Kinzer v. Degler CorporationSupreme Court of Vermont · 1985

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Bassler v. BasslerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
  2. Mobbs v. Central Vermont Railway, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1990
  3. Deyo v. KinleySupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
  4. In Re Estate of RaedelSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
  5. Imported Car Center, Inc. v. BillingsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1994

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API