Legal Opinion
In Re Eustance Act 250 Juris. Opinion (No. 2-231)
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided March 13, 2009No. 2007-156PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.
¶ 1. Robert and Lourdes Eustance appeal an Environmental Court order that required an Act 250 permit amendment for the construction of improvements to their property. The Eustances argue that the improvements they constructed were for alpaca farming and thus are exempt from Act 250 review under 10 V.S.A. § 6001(3)(D)(i). We disagree that the farming exemption applies and affirm.
¶ 2. The following facts are not disputed. The Eustances own 47.64 acres on French Hollow Road in Bondville, Vermont. The French Hollow property, with a house on it, was purchased by the Eustances from James Ellis in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re DenioSupreme Court of Vermont · 1992
- In Re Stowe Club HighlandsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1996
- Swett v. Haig's, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1995
- Washington v. PierceSupreme Court of Vermont · 2005
- In Re Ambassador Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In Re Eastview at Middlebury, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2010
- In Re Village Associates Act 250 Land Use PermitSupreme Court of Vermont · 2010
- In re Request for Jurisdictional Opinion re: Changes in Physical Structure and Use at Burlington International Airport for F-35ASupreme Court of Vermont · 2015
- In re Snyder Group, Inc. PUD Final PlatSupreme Court of Vermont · 2020
- In Re Times and Seasons, LLCSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.