Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Roberts v. State

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided June 20, 1986No. 83-170Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPeck, J.

I concur with both the majority and Chief Justice Billings that the trial court’s instructions to the jury were insufficient and erroneous. Further, I agree with, and join in the dissenting opinion of the Chief Justice to the extent of his conclusion that, at least under the facts of this case, the plaintiffs failed to prove the existence of any duty on the part of the defendant State to maintain the traffic light for their benefit. I share his view that, on this basis, the court erred in refusing to grant defendant’s motion for a directed verdict.

*169Regardless of the above, I believe that the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Humphrey v. Twin State Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1927
  2. Rivers v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1974
  3. Woodcock's Admr. v. HallockSupreme Court of Vermont · 1925
  4. Morse v. Town of RichmondSupreme Court of Vermont · 1868
  5. Smith v. GroveSupreme Court of Vermont · 1956

10 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