Schmitt v. Force (2011)

Citation: Schmitt v. Force (2011)
Parent Document: Schmitt v. Force (2011)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2011-03-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4489909/schmitt-v-force/ ↗

Full Text

1,115 chars

Schmitt further argues that Judge French should not have found that the lease agreement
was invalid and unenforceable. The existence of an agreement is a question of fact, which
depends, in part, on the reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the facts of the case.
Quenneville v. Buttolph, 2003 VT 82, 175 Vt. 444. Here, the evidence introduced by the parties
clearly supported Judge French’s findings. For one, the lease agreement was signed by the
parties well after they had moved in together. Furthermore, Plaintiff collected no security
deposit from Defendant. Whether or not this was an arrangement that both parties seriously
sought to be enforceable is clearly in doubt based on the facts surrounding the relationship.
When the evidence is conflicting, the weight of the evidence and its persuasive effect are
questions for the trier of fact, whose determination must stand if supported by credible evidence.
Gilbert v. Davis, 144 Vt. 459, 461 (1984). Consequently, Judge French’s factual determination
that the contract was void is sufficiently supported by the evidence in the record and will stand.

Other Sections in This Document (38)

Full Text