Tetreault v. Greenwood, 95-390
| Decision Date | 21 June 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-390,95-390 |
| Citation | 165 Vt. 577,682 A.2d 949 |
| Parties | Karen and Roland TETREAULT v. Frederick J. GREENWOOD, et al. |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
Before ALLEN, C.J., and GIBSON, DOOLEY, MORSE and JOHNSON, JJ.
Plaintiffs appeal the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the attorney who represented them in the purchase of a home. The attorney allegedly issued a certificate of title without uncovering violations of local and state permits. We affirm.
Defendant Philip Angell represented plaintiffs in their 1992 purchase of a residential property in Stockbridge. He provided a title certificate stating that the property, which was covered by a subdivision permit, appeared to be in compliance with subdivision regulations because "there is no evidence on non-compliance of record." The certificate excepted "use, zoning, and building restrictions" imposed by "statutes, ordinances and regulations" and "[a]ny facts which would be disclosed by a physical survey or inspection of the premises."
Defendant concedes that he never saw plaintiffs' property, and it is undisputed that three permit violations were discovered by plaintiffs subsequent to their purchase: (1) the location of the house violates the setback required by the local permit, (2) the water supply well is too close to the road and the house, and (3) the leach field sits too close to the house and the well.
Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that his conduct fell within the degree of care commonly exercised by reasonable lawyers in Vermont and adding that "if there were any actionable malpractice on the part of this defendant, which is denied, it is not so apparent that it may be understood by a lay trier without the aid of an expert." Plaintiffs did not file an affidavit or representation from any expert concerning the duty or standard of care required of an attorney in certifying title or ascertaining compliance with permit conditions. The court granted defendant's motion and denied plaintiffs' cross-motion for summary judgment and motion for reconsideration. The present appeal followed.
Plaintiffs argue that defendant was negligent in failing to advise them of the existence and significance of the state and local permits, contending that it was not necessary for defendant to conduct a field inspection to discover this information. Whether defendant should have discussed and explained the general role of state and local permits in Vermont--a question we do not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roberts v. Chimileski
...to comprehend it. . . ." Nicholson, 168 Vt. at 497-98,724 A.2d at 1028. In doing so, we distinguished Nicholson from Tetreault v. Greenwood, 165 Vt. 577, 578, 682 A.2d 949, 950 (1996) (mem.), where we found that expert testimony was required to demonstrate that a Vermont attorney had breach......
-
Estate of Fleming v. Nicholson
...elements must be established by expert testimony to assist the trier of fact in determining negligence. See Tetreault v. Greenwood, 165 Vt. 577, 578, 682 A.2d 949, 950 (1996) (mem.) (expert testimony required to show that defendant failed to adhere to standard of care commonly exercised by ......
-
Travelers Insurance Companies v. Demarle, Inc. USA, 2003-527
...brought to the trial court's attention, and was directly contrary to the CEO's deposition testimony. See Tetreault v. Greenwood, 165 Vt. 577, 578, 682 A.2d 949, 949 (1996) (mem.) ("It is well settled that a party opposing summary judgment must inform the trial court of legal and factual rea......
-
Rheaume v. Maguire
...of the attorney measured by his or her failure to perform in accordance with established standards of skill and care"); Tetreault v. Greenwood, 165 Vt. 577, 578, (1996) (mem.) ("Absent expert testimony that defendant failed to adhere to standard of care commonly exercised by Vermont attorne......
-
Ruminations
...172 Vt. 535 (2001). [23] State v. Therrien, 175 Vt. 342 (2003). [24] Hedges v. Durrance, 175 Vt. 588 (2003). [25] Tetreault v. Greenwood, 165 Vt. 577 (1996). [26] Howard Bank v. Estate of Pope, 156 Vt. 537 (1991). [27] Knott v. Pratt, 158 Vt. 334, 335 (1992). [28] Eaton v. Watts, unreported......