Legal Opinion

Gregory v. Poulin Auto Sales, Inc.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 12, 2012No. 11-236PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶ 1. Defendant Poulin Auto Sales appeals from a trial court judgment awarding attorney’s fees under the Vermont Consumer Fraud Act (VCFA). Poulin argues that the court erred in holding it liable under the VCFA and refusing to reconsider evidence that the vehicle was sold “as is.” We affirm.

¶ 2. Poulin operates a dealership and purchases vehicles wholesale at auctions. In September 2006, Poulin purchased a 2001 Audi for $4800 at auction, where it received a clean document of title and an odometer disclosure form. The previous owner attested to the odometer’s accuracy on the bill of sale.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. In Re PooleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1978
  2. Hudson v. Town of East MontpelierSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
  3. Carter v. GugliuzziSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
  4. Rubin v. Sterling Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1996
  5. Northern Security Insurance Co. v. Mitec Electronics, Ltd.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2008

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Grocery Manufacturers Ass'n v. SorrellDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 2015
  2. Lasek v. Vermont Vapor, Inc., and Downing Properties, LLCSupreme Court of Vermont · 2014
  3. Stowe Aviation, LLC v. Agency of Commerce & Community DevelopmentSupreme Court of Vermont · 2024
  4. Timothy Terry and Penny Terry v. William O'Brien and Susan Cain O'BrienSupreme Court of Vermont · 2015
  5. Cheyeann Crossman v. Denecker Chevrolet, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2023

7 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