Brattleboro Savings and Loan Association v. Hardie
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Concurrence
Burgess, J.,
¶ 20. concurring. I concur with the majority’s mandate as well as its underlying reasoning, but I also concur with Judge Bent’s opinion as an alternative basis for reversing the superior court summary judgment decisions.
¶ 21. Bent, Supr. J., Specially Assigned, concurring. I concur with the majority’s mandate because Mangini cannot rely upon 27 V.S.A. § 141(a) to avoid an existing mortgage that merely refinanced a debt on the homestead that existed before she established the homestead. Under the circumstances of this case, I agree with the majority that neither her pending divorce…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Swift v. KraemerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Winkles v. PowellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Speck v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
- Rendleman v. RendlemanIllinois Supreme Court · 1886
- Katsivalis v. Serrano Reconveyance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1977
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.