Lavalette v. Noyes

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that trial court’s findings indicating defendant’s direct involvement in wrongful cutting of trees “were legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s liability for trespass as a principal”
• considering whether to apply a presumption of falsity, as a sanction for destruction of evidence
• affirming treble damages where the plaintiff’s exclusive ownership of timber was not contested on appeal
• affirming treble damages where the plaintiff's exclusive ownership of timber was not contested on appeal
• best evidence rule “does not exclude evidence which is not aimed at the contents of the instrument,” such as observation of who signed the document
• Supreme Court has “recognized that the elements of damages under 13 V.S.A. § 3606 vary with the kind, condition, location, and use of the damaged trees”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).