Goodwin v. Franklin (2012)

Citation: Goodwin v. Franklin (2012)
Parent Document: Goodwin v. Franklin (2012)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2012-12-20
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4489763/goodwin-v-franklin/ ↗

Full Text

787 chars

The evidence shows that from November of 2010, approximately five months
after moving into their residence, continuing to the present, Landlord has periodically and
persistently interrupted the flow of water to the Tenants’ residence to a significant degree.
The findings of fact are also clear that Landlord has been acting willfully in interrupting
the flow of water to Tenants’ residence during this time. Thus, Tenants are entitled to a
remedy under § 4464(a). Due to the severity and malicious nature of Landlord’s actions,
Tenants are entitled to both compensatory and punitive damages. Villeneuve v. Beane,
2007 VT 75, ¶ 10, 182 Vt. 575 (recognizing “an exception to the general rule that breach
of contract does not support punitive damages when the breach has the character of a

Other Sections in This Document (54)

Full Text