Fletcher Hill, Inc. v. Crosbie, 178 Vt. 77 (2005)

Citation: Fletcher Hill, Inc. v. Crosbie, 178 Vt. 77 (2005)
Parent Document: Fletcher Hill, Inc. v. Crosbie, 178 Vt. 77 (2005)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2005-01-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8209845/fletcher-hill-inc-v-crosbie/ ↗

Full Text

834 chars

¶ 30. Without citation to any authority, the majority concludes that the court could deny plaintiff attorney’s fees under the contract for two reasons. The first is that defendant claimed numerous deficiencies in performance, the jury found a few, and the trial court concluded that the jury could have found more. In asserting this reason, the majority, like the trial judge, is warring with the jury determination that plaintiff substantially performed. Indeed, the majority’s view is transparent because it details one of the alleged construction defects, a defect that the jury could not have found, consistent with the monetary amount of its verdict for defendant. The jury determines the facts in this case, not this Court or the trial judge, and its factual findings are directly contrary to those on which the majority relies.

Other Sections in This Document (57)

Full Text