Legal Community

Pursuant to the Vermont Constitution, Chapter II, Sections 30, 31, and 37, and the provisions of Act NO. 154 (Adj. Sess. 2009), § 30(a), Administrative Order No. 30 dealing with the location of the family court is repealed.

The Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing were adopted as emergency rules to provide a framework for the initiation of the Judiciary’s eCabinet electronic filing system in the Superior Court Civil Division for the Rutland and Windsor county units on October 18, 2010.  Conforming emergency amendments to affected provisions of Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules for Dissemination of Electronic Case Records are being adopted simultaneously.

 

The use of eCabinet will be permissive for most Rutland and Windsor civil dockets in all cases filed between October 18, and December 6, 2010.  Use of the system will be mandatory, with certain exceptions provided in Rule 2, in all cases on those dockets filed on or after December 6, 2010.  It is anticipated that use of the system will be permissive in the remaining county units of the Civil Division in all cases on those dockets filed on or after December 6, 2010, and mandatory in those units in all cases on those dockets filed on or after February 7, 2011.

Comments on these rules and emergency amendments can be sent by September 30, 2010 to:

 

Kinvin Wroth, Reporter
Rules Committees
Vermont Law School
Chelsea Street
South Royalton, VT  05068
kwroth@vermontlaw.edu

Administrative Order No. 37 (Experimental Rule for Mandatory Legal Education Proceedings in all Courts in Chittenden County) is abrogated.

Emergency amendments to V.R.C.P. 77(d), V.R.Cr.P. 56(d) and V.R.P.P. 77(d) and V.R.A.P 45(c) to allow the Court to take appropriate steps to reduce the costs of service in the face of economic exigencies.

Amendments to V.R.C.P Form 1A (which simlified the form) and V.R.E.C.P. 5(b)(3) and (d)(2) (which corrected a drafting error in the original rule).

Changes to Forms 72 and 80 made it necessary to implement recent amendments to 14 V.S.A Chapter 111, enacted by Act 186 of 2007 (Adj. Session).

Pursuant to the Vermont Constitution, Chapter II, Sections 30, 31, and 37, and the provisions of 4 V.S.A § 30 (b), Administrative Order No. 14 is amended to read the Appellate and Administrative Responsibilities of the Supreme Court.

Pursuant to the Vermont Constitution, Chapter II, Sections 30, 31, and 37, and the provisions of 4 V.S.A §§ 30 and 73, Administrative Order No 13. dealing with the division of the district, superior, and family courts into geographic divisions and the assignment of judges to those divisions.

Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules of Appellate Procedure and A.O. 4 which incorporate rule changes made necessary by the enactment of Act No. 185 of 2007 (Adj. Sess.).

Family Court Case Disposition Guidelines for Juvenile Docket.

Title 4 V.S.A. § 355 provides that a probate judge of another district may perform the duties of a probate judge when that judge is incapacitated.  The amendment to Administrative Order No. 18 adds § 4(a)(3) in order to establish a mechanism for the Administrative Judge to designate which probate judge will be assigned to perform those duties

The amendments to §§ 3(b) and 4(a)(1) address the issue of accessibility to quality professionalism courses while respecting the underlying intent and objective of the rule: to create a forum in which legal professionals explore and reflect on the meaning and goals of professionalism in contemporary legal practice.  The requirement in Rule 3 that professionalism courses be “face to face” was eliminated, and replaced by the option of attending via “teleconference, interactive television or on-line.”  Rule 4(a)(1) was further amended to make it clear that, in order to qualify as “live” credit, the instructor and attendees must be able to participate and interact simultaneously, in real time.

The amendments to §§ 6 (b), (c) and (d) and 7(b) improve efficiencies during the relicensing period of attorneys by removing the requirement that the form which indicates compliance with the Continuing Legal Education Rules be in the form of an affidavit.  This will allow for on-line continuing legal education reporting. 

The amendment to § 8(b) clarifies the intent that the twenty hours required for reinstatement to active status must include the categories and restrictions of the standard reporting requirements in §§ 3 and 4 of the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education.

The amendment adding Rule 24(f) was made to permit the court to select a sufficient number of jurors to make up both a jury of twelve and between one and four alternates without predetermining the identity of the alternates.  The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 43(c) clarifies that the defendant’s presence is not required at a conference or argument on a question of law.  Under the amended rule, the defendant’s presence is required only at those proceedings specified in subdivision (a) or otherwise would be ordered by the court. 

These emergency amendments were made to conform with amendments made by the Legislature to Vermont Rule of Criminal Procedure 3(c)(6) and Vermont Rules for Public Access to Court Records 6(b)(34) and (35). See 2007, No. 185 (adj. Sess.), §§ 6 and 7.

The Supreme Court amended Administrative Order No. 1 to conform A.O. 1 with Title 4 V.S.A. § 601(b)(5). 

The emergency amendments to V.R.F.P. 1-3, 6 and 12 and V.R.A.P. 3(d), 8(c)(2), 10(b)(7), 26(b) and (d) and A.O. No. 4 have been made permanent.

Amendments to Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure 16.2,26,33(c),34,37(f) and 45 incorporate amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning discovery of electronically stored information. Amendment to V.R.C.P. 50(b) incorporates changes in F.R.C.P. 50 related to timing of a motion for judgment after trial.

The emergency amendment adding V.R.C.P. 80.1(b)(3) has been found beneficial and is continued for two additional years while other amendments to Rule 80.1, designed to allow it to operate more fairly in the present financial climate, are being considered.

The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 16(c) exempts law enforcement officers who have participated in an investigation from the rule limiting prosecution access to witnesses first included on a defense witness list.

The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 18(b) is added to require prosecution of pre-trial release violations in the county or circuit of the court that imposed the conditions of release unless defendant is charged with a new offense.

The amendment of V.R.Cr.P. 24(d) adds language permitting the court to retain alternate jurors after the jury retires in order to ensure the availability of a sufficient number of jurors if a sitting juror is unable to complete deliberations.

The amendments to V.R.Cr.P. 32(a) and (b) eliminate gender references and permit the clerk to sign a judgment reflecting the court’s ruling from the bench.

The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 32(c) provides defense attorneys notice and an opportunity to attend PSI interviews of the defendant.

The proposed amendment to Rule 1.15B(d) is at the request of the Professional Responsibility Board to modernize and clarify the operation of the rule.  The proposed amendment would make clear that institutions must notify Disciplinary Counsel, rather than the Board, not only when an instrument presented against insufficient funds is honored or dishonored, but whenever any transaction—whether electronic, paper, wire, or other—causes an overdraft to an attorney trust account. The proposed amendment reflects the evolving nature of banking practices and the fact that some newer types of transactions do not involve an instrument being presented against an account: for example, Automated Clearing House (ACH) transactions.   Conforming changes are made in Rule 1.15B(e).

Comments on these proposed amendments can be sent by September 20, 2010 to:

William Griffin, Esq.
Vermont Attorney General’s Office
109 State Street
Montpelier, VT  05609-1001
bgriffin@atg.state.vt.us

Proposed amendments to V.R.C.P. 62(a) and V.R.E.C.P. 3(9) and (10).

The proposed amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 3(c)(9) would conform the rule to provisions regarding abuse of vulnerable adults for conformity with the language of legislative changes recodified in Title 13, Chapter 28, adopted in Acts 2005, No. 79.

The proposed amendments adding V.R.Cr.P. 26(e) and V.R.A.P. 10(b)(8) would provide a procedure that will ensure accurate identification of portions of audio and video recordings actually presented to the fact-finder at trial, as asked by the Supreme Court in State v. Lee, 2008 VT 128, paragraph 9.

The proposed amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 32(c)(4) would bring the rule into conformance with a 1999 legislative change to 13 V.S.A. § 5231.

The proposed amendment of V.R.Cr.P. 41 would reorganize the present rule, extend its present provisions concerning issuance of warrants by fax to include other electronic means, and add provisions for warrants to monitor conversations.

The proposed amendments of V.R.Cr.P. 44.2(b) and A.O. 41 would permit nonresident attorneys clerking or employed as government attorneys to appear in all actions assigned by the supervising attorney on the basis of a single motion.

Proposed Amendments of V.R.P.P. 3, 17, 60.1, 66, and 67, and Forms 110-112 (including new Forms 110A and 110B) would conform to the Vermont Trust Code, 14A V.S.A. §§ 101-1204, enacted by Act 20 of 2009 § 1.

 

Proposed Amendments of V.R.P.P. 13 and Forms 19, 46, 47, and 48 would conform the rule and forms to 14 V.S.A. ch. 42, enacted by Act 55 of 2009, § 5, to replace 14 V.S.A., chs. 41-45.

 

Proposed Amendments of V.R.P.P. 80.6(a) and Form 122 would implement the requirement of 15 V.S.A. § 817, enacted by Act 58 of 2009, § 12, that the probate court request information from the department of public safety as to whether a petitioner for name change is listed on the sex offender registry and allow appearance by the department if the petitioner is listed.

 

Proposed Amendment of V.R.P.P. Forms 2 and 5 would incorporate references to forms to be attached to them.

 

Proposed Amendment of V.R.P.P. Form 3 would eliminate language concerning authentication of foreign administrator.

 

Proposed Amendment of V.R.P.P. Forms 57, 57A would restore language to the Forms for clarity.

 

Proposed addition of Form 115 would implement 2004 and 2006 legislation that added 14 V.S.A. § 2314(c) and (e) providing for removal of a trustee on petition of a co-trustee or a majority of the beneficiaries, now repealed and incorporated in 14A V.S.A. § 706.