Garcia v. Birch (2024)

Citation: Garcia v. Birch (2024)
Parent Document: Garcia v. Birch (2024)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2024-09-23
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10124239/garcia-v-birch/ ↗

Full Text

1,011 chars

Entry Regarding Motion                                                                       Page 3 of 4
24-CV-01231 Dayami Garcia et al v. Allan Birch et al
         The present case is more disjointed. Each of the preceding causes of action have been
found wanting, and Plaintiffs were effectively trying to revive a walking dead-man by introducing
separate and new re-animating claims. While Rule 15 does allow liberal amendments, it must be
read within the context of the statutes behind ejectment and the supporting case law. Under 9
V.S.A. § 4468, a landlord’s right to seek ejectment under 12 V.S.A. § 4853 does not arise until the
tenancy is terminated. In this case, where the prior terminations were facially invalid, the Court will
not allow the artificial resuscitation sought by Plaintiffs. Andrus v. Dunbar, 2005 VT 48, ¶ 15
(“Because the tenancy had not been terminated on the date that the landlord brought the ejectment
action, the trial court should have entered judgment for tenant.”). ORDER

Other Sections in This Document (29)

Full Text