Legal Opinion

Town of Charlotte v. Richmond

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 14, 1992No. 90-528PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, C.J.

Defendants appeal from an amended order of the superior court limiting the volume of their used car sales to fifty-two cars per year. The Town of Charlotte cross-appeals, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain defendants’ affirmative defense of nonconforming use. We agree with the town and therefore vacate the court’s amended order. We remand for an order enforcing the town’s determination that defendants operated their business in violation of its zoning ordinance and for a determination of fines.

This case originated with a notice, issued by the town’s zoning administrator…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Marathon Oil Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  2. Soucy v. Soucy Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1983
  3. Hinsdale v. Village of Essex JunctionSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
  4. Town of Sandgate v. ColehamerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
  5. Town of Sherburne v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Bischoff v. BletzSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
  2. City of South Burlington v. Department of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
  3. In Re Appeal of Newton EnterprisesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
  4. In Re Appeal of GulliSupreme Court of Vermont · 2002
  5. Petition of FairchildSupreme Court of Vermont · 1992

51 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