Levinsky v. State
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Per curiam 1
Plaintiff, Bruce J. Levinsky, brought an action denominated “action for declaratory judgment.” The action was dismissed because “the appropriate avenue for relief in this matter was through the use of Rule 60(b), rather than through a petition for declaratory judgment.” This dismissal was appealed to this Court and returned for a rehearing before a properly constituted court. An order granting summary judgment for the defendant was then issued. From that order plaintiffs appealed. We affirm.
A declaratory judgment action is not necessarily barred by the existence of another remedy. However,…
Also in this document: Per curiam 2.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Bankers Mortgage Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- National Surety Co. v. State BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Edward Serzysko v. The Chase Manhattan BankCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
- West Virginia Oil & Gas Co., Inc. v. George E. Breece Lumber Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1954
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Godin v. GodinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
- Miller v. MillerSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
- Perrott v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
- Barnet Hydro Co. v. Public Service BoardSupreme Court of Vermont · 2002
- Pierce v. VaughanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.