Legal Opinion

In re Chittenden Solid Waste District

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 20, 2007No. 05-217PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.

¶ 1. Hinesburg Sand & Gravel Company, Inc. (HS&G) appeals from an amended judgment of $4 million in damages for the condemnation of its sand pit by Chittenden Solid Waste District (the District) to create a solid waste landfill. *40Following a jury verdict, the Chittenden Superior Court granted the District’s motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to V.R.C.P. 50(b). The court ruled that HS&G suffered no compensable business loss, and it set aside that part of the verdict that awarded HS&G an additional $4.8 million for business loss. HS&G argues that the court erred in granting the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Danforth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. United States v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Rezzonico v. H & R Block, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
  5. Maharaj v. Bankamerica Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In Re Chittenden Solid Waste Dist.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  2. In re Chittenden Solid Waste DistrictSupreme Court of Vermont · 2012
  3. Appeal of Van NostrandVermont Superior Court · 2009
  4. Our Lady of Guadalupe Home Found., Inc. v. MassuccoVermont Superior Court · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API