Atwood v. Hill (2024)

Citation: Atwood v. Hill (2024)
Parent Document: Atwood v. Hill (2024)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2024-10-17
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10145325/atwood-v-hill/ ↗

Full Text

680 chars

9 V.S.A. § 2461(b). The basis of defendants claim under the CFA is the preexisting leaking roof. The
defendants were aware of the leaking roof when they entered the lease with the plaintiff. This is evident
from the testimony of Mr. Hill and the text message contained within Exhibit A. There was no fraud or
deceit on the part of the plaintiff. The court does not find that the plaintiff promised the roof would be
fixed prior to the tenancy starting. The defendants have not met their burden and they are not entitled to
relief on their claim.
        In summary, defendants are entitled to $2,100 on their claim regarding the plaintiff’s failure to
return the security deposit.

Other Sections in This Document (15)

Full Text