Stephens v. Gilmour (2025)

Citation: Stephens v. Gilmour (2025)
Parent Document: Stephens v. Gilmour (2025)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2025-02-28
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10347872/stephens-v-gilmour/ ↗

Full Text

762 chars

“A motion to dismiss . . . is not favored and rarely granted.” This is
        especially true “when the asserted theory of liability is novel or extreme,” as
        such cases “should be explored in the light of facts as developed by the
        evidence, and, generally, not dismissed before trial because of the mere
        novelty of the allegations.” In reviewing a motion to dismiss, we consider
        whether, taking all of the nonmoving party’s factual allegations as true, “‘it
        appears beyond doubt’ that there exist no facts or circumstances that would
        entitle the plaintiff to relief.” We treat all reasonable inferences from the
        complaint as true, and we assume that the movant’s contravening
        assertions are false.

Other Sections in This Document (168)

Full Text