Supreme Court of Vermont· 1/27/1989
State v. Hagen
Citations
- 557 A.2d 493
- 151 Vt. 64
- 1989 Vt. LEXIS 10
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that questions of credibility of witnesses and weight of evidence are left to sound discretion of trial court
- finding “no support in Vermont law” for argument that the trial court’s conclusion that a witness was incredible must be accompanied by “some finding showing the reasoning of the court in rejecting the testimony, or some other support in the record”
- trier of fact has sole discretion to determine weight of evidence, credibility of witnesses, and persuasive effect of testimony
- trier of fact has sole discretion to determine weight of evidence, credibility of witnesses, and persuasive effect of testimony
- finder of fact is best positioned to determine weight of evidence, credibility and demeanor of witnesses, and persuasive effect of testimony, and findings will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous
- finder of fact is best positioned to determine weight of evidence, credibility and demeanor of witnesses, and persuasive effect of testimony, and findings will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Allen, Peck, Gibson, Dooley, Morse
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Benson v. MuscariSupreme Court of Vermont· 2001-02-02· cited 26×
- State v. Jonathan BrunoSupreme Court of Vermont· 2012-10-05· cited 22×
- State v. MerchantSupreme Court of Vermont· 2001-12-21· cited 19×
- State v. FreemanSupreme Court of Vermont· 2004-06-10· cited 17×
- In Re CalderonSupreme Court of Vermont· 2003-10-29· cited 6×
- Bennington Housing Authority v. BushSupreme Court of Vermont· 2007-07-20· cited 6×
- State v. Edwin RodriguezSupreme Court of Vermont· 2023-11-09· cited 2×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. DerouchieSupreme Court of Vermont· 1981-11-19· cited 68×
- Armstrong v. Hanover Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Vermont· 1972-02-01· cited 44×
- Bookstaver v. Town of WestminsterSupreme Court of Vermont· 1973-02-06· cited 40×
- State v. O'CONNELLSupreme Court of Vermont· 1986-03-28· cited 15×
- Capital Candy Company v. City of MontpelierSupreme Court of Vermont· 1968-12-03· cited 11×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.