Legal Opinion
Adams v. B & D Builders & Developers, Inc.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided April 27, 1984No. 83-001PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeck, J.
Plaintiff, John T. Adams, appeals the dismissal of his suit against co-defendant Dolores Persons by the Rutland Superior Court.
The sole issue presented on appeal is whether the notice provision of 9A V.S.A. § 9 — 504(3) of the Vermont Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) requires actual or constructive notice to debtors to validate a sale of collateral after default on a loan obligation. On the facts of this case, we hold that constructive notice was sufficient. Accordingly, we reverse.
Defendants Maynard and Dolores Persons are husband and wife. Prior to this action they were sole shareholders of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A. v. NatarelliNew York Supreme Court · 1977
- FMA Financial Corp. v. Pro-PrintersUtah Supreme Court · 1979
- Chemlease Worldwide Inc. v. Brace, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Merchants National Bank & Trust Co. of Indianapolis v. H.L.C. Enterprises, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1982
- Chittenden Trust Co. v. MaryanskiSupreme Court of Vermont · 1980
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Shawmut Worcester County Bank, N.A. v. MillerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Reeves v. Habersham BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1985
- Connolly v. Bank of Sonoma CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- United States v. LangDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 1985
- Vermont National Bank v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.