| Amendment to Administrative Order No. 14 | | Appellate and Administrative Responsibilities of the Supreme Court
| Promulgated | | March 14, 2012 | March 14, 2012 | 97 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/22/2012 8:37 |
| Consolidated Amendments to Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing, Dissemination of Electronic Case Records, Rules of Appellate Procedure, Civil Rules of Procedure, Administrative Order Nos. 41, 44 and 45 | | Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing
[Adopted as Emergency Rules on August 17, 2010; Amended on October 20, 2010, December 14, 2010, February 23, 2011; March 22, 2011]
Emergency amendments made permanent on August 30, 2011, effective October 31, 2011
Further Amendments to Rules 3(f) and 10(a) adopted on August 30, 2011; eff. October 31, 2011
Additional Amendments to Rules 3(b) and (c); adopted on May 30, 2012; eff. July 30, 2012
| Consolidated | | | | | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 13:45 |
| Emergency Amendments to Rules Governing Qualification, List, Selection and Summoning of All Jurors | | These emergency amendments to the Rules Governing Qualification, List, Selection and Summoning of all Jurors streamline and improve the efficiency of jury management by eliminating a duplicative step. The amended procedure will enable the Judiciary to conserve resources, lower costs, and make the changes necessary to implement a technology-based jury management system. The new procedure will also reduce the inconvenience to citizens by lowering the number of people who must complete questionnaires and providing the framework for questionnaires to be completed electronically as well as manually. | Promulgated | | May 24, 2011 | June 2, 2011 | 82 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/1/2011 14:35 |
| Order Promulgating Amendment to § 3 of the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education | | After continuing difficulties with the administration of the professionalism requirement, the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Board unanimously recommended to the Court to amend § 3(b), striking the two-hour professionalism credit requirement. Rule 3(b) will continue to allow for general CLE credit for courses related to professionalism. Rule 3(c) has been eliminated as it is no longer applicable. | Promulgated | | May 24, 2011 | July 24, 2011 | 81 | | Deb Laferriere | 6/3/2011 9:16 |
| Administrative Order No. 18 Amendments | | Amendments to Duties of Administrative Judge | Promulgated | | February 7, 2011 | February 7, 2011 | 75 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:28 |
| Administrative Order No. 43 - Preservation and Storage of Search Warrant Records | | This Order provides that Court records required and stored under 4 V.S.A. § 740 include records of search warrant requests that are not granted and records of search warrant requests that are granted as of the time that the judge issues the search warrant. While this administrative order establishes the proper policy, the Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure is requested to propose to the Court amendments to Rule 41 of the Vermont Rules of Criminal Procedure to implement the procedure. | Promulgated | | January 20, 2012 | January 20, 2012 | 96 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/24/2012 8:11 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rules 12, 13 and 18 of A.O. 9 | | These amendments provide a clear and concise method regarding access to disciplinary information in proceedings for interim suspension. | Promulgated | | August 31, 2011 | October 31, 2011 | 86 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/1/2011 14:27 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Electronic Filing | |
The amendments to V.R.E.F. 3(a) and (b), 7(d), 12(g), V.R.C.P. 79.1, V.R.A.P. 3(d), 10(a)(3), 13(c) & 45.1, V.R.F.P. 15(i), V.R.E.P. 5(c), V.R.Cr.P. 44.2(e) and V.R.P.P. 79.1(i) require attorneys appearing in cases in the superior court and the Supreme Court in their initial filing to provide the court with their eCabinet registration number that was assigned on registering an e-mail address or addresses pursuant to Rule 3 of the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing. The requirement also applies to self-represented litigants in the Supreme Court who choose to receive documents and notices by e-mail.
These amendments were promulgated on February 6, 2013, and effective April 8, 2013. | Promulgated | | February 6, 2013 | April 8, 2013 | 115 | | Deb Laferriere | 2/12/2013 12:58 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to A.O. 45 | | The amendments to A.O. 45 expand the use of e-mail delivery of court-generated notices and documents to the Supreme Court and the Judicial Bureau and to self-represented litigants and case participants other than lawyers representing litigants. The amendments also make changes in the procedures for e-mail delivery of notices and documents in light of the experience in the units and divisions of the superior court that have employed the e-mail delivery. These amendments promulgated on February 6, 2013, are effective on April 8, 2013. | Promulgated | | February 6, 2013 | April 8, 2013 | 116 | | Deb Laferriere | 2/12/2013 12:14 |
| Order Promulating Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court for the Disciplinary Control of Judges | | These amendments promulgated on December 21, 2010, effective February 21, 2011, address concerns of the Judicial Conduct Board regarding the procedural rules applicable to its work. | Promulgated | | December 21, 2010 | February 21, 2011 | 72 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:29 |
| Emergency Amendments to Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure 5(g), 84 and Abrogating the Appendix of Forms to those Rules | | The emergency amendment to Rule 5(g) deletes the final sentence requiring use of the forms in the Appendix of Forms unless otherwise permitted by the Court. The emergency amendment to Rule 84 states that the new practice will be that the Chief Administrative Judge will adopt, publish, and make available forms that may be used for particular purposes. Furthermore, the amendment abrogates the Appendix of Forms appended to the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure. | Promulgated | | June 21, 2011 | July 15, 2011 | 83 | | Deb Laferriere | 11/2/2011 9:31 |
| Order Promulgating Amendment to A.O. 9, Rule 12.F. | | This amendment, promulgated on December 21, 2010, effective February 21, 2011, allows complainants and respondents to disclose to anyone if a complaint has been filed and what the disposition, if any, of the complaint was. | Promulgated | | December 21, 2010 | February 21, 2011 | 71 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/4/2012 7:33 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 1.15B(d) and (e) of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct | | This amendment, promulgated on December 21, 2010, and effective February 21, 2011, modernizes and clarifies Rules 1.15B(d) and (e) by making clear that depositary 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. | Promulgated | | December 21, 2010 | February 21, 2011 | 70 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/31/2011 14:05 |
| Amendment to Administrative Order No. 41 - Licensing of Attorneys | | The amendment to § 7 of A.O. 41 requires that every attorney’s licensing statement include a certification that the attorney has a registered e-mail address as required by V.R.E.F. 3. The purpose of the amendment is to facilitate the requirements of mandatory registration by all attorneys as to electronic filers under that rule and the decoupling of the requirement of submitting an e-mail address for bar administrative purposes under A.O. 41 from the requirement of submitting one or more e-mail addresses for electronic filing purposes under V.R.E.F. 3.
| Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 104 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:29 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to § 4 of Administrative Order No. 41 | | In conjunction with the amendment to the Rules of Admission to the Bar of the Vermont Supreme Court, license fees have been changed from a pro-rated fee to a flat fee. The flat fee is less than the applicant would pay if the fee were pro-rated because the new attorney is licensed for a period between two years and three years.
| Promulgated | | July 17, 2012 | September 1, 2012 | 112 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:33 |
| Administrative Order No. 44 - Registration for Receipt of Documents by Electronic Mail | | A.O. 44 facilitates the simultaneous adoption of A.O. 45. The purpose of the order is to decouple the requirement of submitting an e-mail address pursuant to A.O. 41 for bar administrative purposes from the requirement that all lawyers required to register as electronic filers under V.R.E.F. 3 submit one or more e-mail addresses to which the court may send required notices under V.R.C.P. 77(d) and similar rules. | Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 105 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:33 |
| Administrative Order No. 45 - Delivery of Notices of Hearing and Other Court Documents by E-Mail | | A.O. 45 allows for the introduction of e-mail transmission of court notices under proposed V.R.C.P. 77(d) and similar provisions of other rules as the capacity for such transmission becomes available. | Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 106 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:35 |
| Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing and the Vermont Rules for Dissemination of Electronic Case Records and Continuing Those Rules and Prior Amendments to Them and the VRCP as Emergency Rules and Amendments | | The Court’s Special Advisory Committee on Rules Governing an Electronic Case File and Electronic Filing, and its Advisory Committee on Rules Governing Public Access to Court Records, reported to the Court pursuant to § 7 Administrative Order No. 11, with a summary of all comments received and recommendations for amendments on the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing that were adopted as emergency rules by Order of August 17, 2010, effective October 1, 2010. By Order dated October 20, 2010, the rules have been amended and will continue as emergency rules until further order. The Committees have been directed to report to the Court on a continuing basis concerning any changes to these rules and amendments made necessary by experience in practice under them.
| Promulgated | | October 20, 2010 | October 20, 2010 | 67 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:33 |
| Promulgated Emergency Amendments to Vermont Code of Judicial Conduct, Administrative Order No. 10 | | This emergency amendment promulgated on January 31, 2011, is effective immediately. The emergency amendment to Section B(2) maintains on an interim basis the existing ethical standards governing the right of probate judges to practice law in all divisions of the newly consolidated superior court, except for the probate division, which becomes incorporated into the superior court as of February 1, 2011. The emergency amendment to Section B(3) clarifies the ambiguous use of “court” in the first clause of the prior rule by making clear that the purpose is to prohibit the use of official space in which the judges carries out judicial functions as space which the judge may use for the practice of law.
| Promulgated | | January 31, 2011 | January 31, 2011 | 74 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/1/2011 14:37 |
| Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing and the Vermont Rules for Dissemination of Electronic Case Records and Continuing Those Rules and Prior Amendments to Them as Emergency Rules and Amendments | | Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing and the Vermont Rules for Dissemination of Electronic Case Records and Continuing Those Rules and Prior Amendments to Them as Emergency Rules and Amendments; Promulgated 2/23/11; effective 3/23/11 | Promulgated | | February 23, 2011 | March 23, 2011 | 76 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:36 |
| Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing | | Rule 1(a)(1) applies to all civil actions and proceedings commenced in the Superior Court, Civil Division, Rutland and Windsor units, except small claims actions, small claims appeals, and stalking and sexual assault actions. Electronic filing is permitted in all cases commenced between October 18, 2010 and January 25, 2011, and electronic filing will be required in all cases commenced on or after January 26, 2011.
| Promulgated | | December 14, 2010 | December 14, 2010 | 70 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/4/2012 7:21 |
| Order Abrogating A.O. 28 and Promulgating Emergency Amendment to V.R.A.P. 10 | |
Administrative Order No. 28 has been abrogated. The emergency amendment to V.R.A.P. 10 makes general edits to reflect that the creation of transcripts for use on appeal is contracted to companies providing transcription service rather than individual transcribers. Rule 10(b)(2) clarifies that transcripts may be ordered directly on the transcription services’ websites without the use of a paper order form. The revised rule allows parties to provide a copy of the transcript order to represented parties by electronic mail. Rule 10(b)(7) no longer references A.O. 28, which has been abrogated, and delineates that the transcription service may require a deposit prior to beginning transcription. Parties are informed of the specific deposit amount by the transcription service and the Court Administrator’s Office sets limits on that amount.
| Promulgated | | February 6, 2013 | February 6, 2013 | 114 | | Deb Laferriere | 2/12/2013 11:11 |
| Emergency Amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 18(a) | | This amendment restores Rule 18(a) to the language prior to the emergency amendment of December 21, 2011. The emergency amendments to Rule 18(b) and the addition of Rule 18(c) remain in effect. | Promulgated | | April 25, 2012 | April 25, 2012 | 102 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:44 |
| Emergency Amendments to V.R.Cr.P. 18(a)(b) and (c) | | These amendments seek to eliminate circumstances under which defendants may be incarcerated for longer than necessary pending transport to the court of the initiating unit, where prompt hearing is available in the unit of their detention following arrest.
Comments on these emergency amendments should be sent to the Chair of the Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure by February 24, 2012. The Chair can be reached by U.S. mail or email at the following address(es):
P. Scott McGee, Esq.
Hershensen, Carter, Scott & McGee
PO Box 909
Norwich, VT 05055-0909
smcgee@hcsmlaw.com
| Promulgated | | December 21, 2011 | December 21, 2011 | 92 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/4/2012 7:17 |
| Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to Rule 5 of the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing and to Rules 28 and 30 of the Vermont Rules of Appellate Procedure | | These emergency amendments promulgated on March 22, 2011, are effective March 23, 2011. V.R.E.F. 5 is amended to set forth the proper procedure for filing a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court. V.R.A.P. 28(d) is amended to accommodate appeals from electronically filed cases by eliminating the printed case in an appeal from such a case. V.R.A.P. 30 is amended to clarify that for appeals with an electronic case record, no printed case is required. | Promulgated | | March 22, 2011 | March 23, 2011 | 78 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:45 |
| Order Promulgating Emergency Amendments to the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure | | These amendments implement Act 154 of 2009, § 7a (Adj. Sess.), An Act Relating to Restructuring of the Judiciary, which enacted 4 V.S.A. § 30(a)(1)(E) adding the Probate Division to the single Superior Court of statewide jurisdiction, effective February 1, 2011.
These emergency amendments promulgated on February 24, 2011, are effective immediately.
| Promulgated | | February 24, 2011 | February 24, 2011 | 77 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:35 |
| Order Extending or Making Permanent Emergency Amendments to V.R.C.P. 80.1 | | The emergency amendment to Rule 80.1(b)(3) of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure has been extended for an additional two years. The amendment requires a notice informing defendants in residential foreclosure cases of free resources available to assist them in trying to arrange to keep their homes, or, where appropriate, make the most favorable arrangements for selling the homes and paying off the debt. This amendment will take effect on January 1, 2012; and is extended until December 31, 2013.
The emergency amendment to Rule 80.1(g)(2) has been made permanent. The rule provides additional protections for foreclosure defendants. This amendment will become effective on February 20, 2012.
| Promulgated | | December 21, 2011 | February 20, 2012 | 94 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/4/2012 7:32 |
| Order Promulgating Amendment to §5 (d) of the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education | | This amendment adds § 5(d) to the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education which provides that credit may be earned by presenting formal education and/or informational programs to non-lawyers, including but not limited to student groups, which are designed to broaden public knowledge and understanding of the law, and/or increase public support and respect for the legal system – up to two hours per reporting period. This amendment is not intended to award credit for instruction primarily aimed at the marketing of the presenter.
| Promulgated | | March 14, 2012 | July 1, 2012 | 99 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/21/2012 14:12 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to § 6(a) of the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education | | This amendment to § 6 allows credit for the continuing legal education courses completed as a requirement for admission without examination under § 7 of the Rules of Admission to the Bar of the Vermont Supreme Court. The credit may be counted toward an admitted attorney’s continuing legal education requirement of twenty hours during their first reporting period.
| Promulgated | | April 25, 2012 | July 1, 2012 | 101 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:45 |
| Order Promulgating Amendment to § 2 of the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education | | This amendment sets term limits for members of the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Board. | Promulgated | | May 24, 2011 | May 31, 2011 | 80 | | Deb Laferriere | 6/3/2011 9:12 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to § 11 of the Rules of Admission to the Bar | | The amendments to Rule 11 address certain perceived inefficiencies in the decision making and appeal process governing proceedings before the Character and Fitness Committee. The amendments establish a hearing and appeal process modeled on those utilized by the Judicial Conduct Board and Professional Responsibility Board.
| Promulgated | | March 29, 2011 | May 31, 2011 | 79 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/31/2011 13:58 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to § 12 of the Vermont Rules of Admission to the Bar | | Rule 12 is amended to provide a procedure for the admission of new attorneys. Under prior practice, applicants seeking admission to the Bar were required to attend an admission ceremony at the Vermont Supreme Court. At the ceremony, the Court would hear and grant an oral motion for admission of new attorneys, and the new attorneys would take the required oaths. The amendment to Rule 12 allows the Board to make a written motion to the Court. Once the motion is granted, the applicant may take the required oath before a Vermont judge or court clerk or before a federal judge or state-court judge in another state. This change in practice allows new attorneys to be admitted more quickly and will eliminate the need for those located outside Vermont to travel to Vermont for admission. | Promulgated | | July 17, 2012 | September 1, 2012 | 111 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:32 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to the Rules of Admission to the Bar of the Vermont Supreme Court | | The amendments eliminate the 3-month clerkship requirement for attorneys admitted to practice in other jurisdictions who are admitted without examination to the Vermont bar. The amendments reflect that change, as well as some housekeeping changes and a revised definition of in-house counsel. | Promulgated | | April 25, 2012 | July 1, 2012 | 100 | | Deb Laferriere | 10/8/2012 14:10 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to V.R.A.P. 10, 12, 28-32, Permanent Adoption of Emergency Amendments to 28(d) and 30; abrogation of 10.1, 12.1 and 28.1 | | The amendments abrogate Rule 10 and replace it with a new rule which makes the rule consistent with current practices concerning ordering and producing transcripts for appeals, particularly with respect to availability of an on-line order form. Rules 10(b)(8) and (b)(9) have been added to provide additional avenues for parties proceeding in forma pauperis to obtain a record of the proceedings without paying for a transcript. Rule 10(b)(8) allows the audio recording to be accepted as the official record of the proceedings if the record is under four hours. The amendment also abrogates Rule 10.1.
The amendments to Rule 12 are for clarity’s sake. The amendment abrogates Rule 12.1.
The amendment makes permanent the emergency amendment to Rule 28(d) that was promulgated on March 23, 2011, and amended further by this order.
The amendment abrogates Rule 28.1 and incorporates it into Rule 28 as a new subdivision.
The amendment to Rule 29 specifies that an amicus brief must comply with Rule 32 form and filing requirements.
The amendment also makes the emergency amendments to Rule 30 that were promulgated and effective March 23, 2011 permanent. The amendments provide that in cases without an electronic case file, a litigant must file only a single paper copy and an electronic copy of the printed case, supplemental printed case, and exhibits. This change will expire June 30, 2013. In addition, new subdivision 30(i) allows service of these materials on represented parties is sufficient by electronic means. Unrepresented parties must receive a paper copy of these materials, unless the parties agree otherwise.
The amendment to Rule 30(f) requiring exhibits for inclusion in the printed case to be filed electronically does not alter the current system that inclusion of any exhibit in the printed case is at counsel’s discretion.
The amendment to Rule 31 reduces to eight the number of paper briefs required to be filed by litigants and continues to require the filing of an electronic brief by represented parties.
The amendment to Rule 32 requires the filing of an electronic version of the printed case by represented parties, in addition to the electronic filing of the brief.
| Promulgated | | March 14, 2012 | May 14, 2012 | 98 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/6/2012 10:13 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rules 28(d) and 72 of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure | | The amendment to V.R.C.P. 28(d), providing for depositions to be taken in Vermont for use in another jurisdiction, limits its applicability to depositions that are to be taken for use in civil actions in a U.S. district court or in proceedings in another country under that country’s laws. The amendment to V.R.C.P. 72 implements the interlocutory appeal provision of the Vermont Trust Code, 14A V.S.A. § 201, and reflects the establishment of the Civil Division pursuant to Act 154 of 2009 (Adj. Sess.). | Promulgated | | July 10, 2012 | September 10, 2012 | 109 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:51 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure and Appellate Procedure | | The amendment to Rule 5(g) permits continued inclusion of a social security number in a document where it is required by federal law. In particular, retirement fund administrators might decline to honor an instrument such as a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) in which the litigants’ social security numbers have been redacted as required by V.R.C.P. 5(g) in the absence of a specific request from the court.
The amendment to Rule 45(f) is added to incorporate the provisions of the Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act (UIDDA), with modifications appropriate to Vermont practice.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(1) makes clear that the purpose of the rule is to provide litigants in a proceeding in another state to use the procedures of the Vermont rules to obtain the forms of discovery covered by the rule.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(2) contains the definitions set forth in UIDDA § 2. Note that the definition of “foreign subpoena” in subparagraph (B) limits the applicability of the rule to subpoenas “issued under the authority of a court of record,” thus excluding subpoenas issued by other tribunals such as administrative agencies or boards of arbitration. Cf. UIDDA § 3, cmt. Note also that the definition of “subpoena” includes a subpoena duces tecum and an order to permit inspection of premises but does not include an order to appear for a physical examination.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(3) is based on UIDDA § 3, with variations to adapt the rule to Vermont practice.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(4) is based on UIDDA § 4, with variations to adapt the rule to Vermont practice and to eliminate any requirement of a return to the issuing court.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(5) adapts UIDDA § 5 to the provisions of the Vermont rule.
The amendment to Rule 45(f)(6) adapts UIDDA § 6 to the provisions of the Vermont rule.
The amendment to Rule 80.5(j) substitutes a more functional standard of review based on the language of V.R.A.P. 5(b).
The amendment to Rule 25(a)(2) is added to include in the Vermont Rules of Appellate Procedure a requirement like that that of V.R.C.P. 5(g), as simultaneously amended, and V.R.Cr.P. 49(c) (incorporating the Civil Rule) that social security numbers must be redacted from any paper to be filed unless otherwise requested by the Supreme Court or required by law. The number must be redacted from a paper in the printed case even if the number was requested by the trial court, and included in the trial court filing, unless the Supreme Court requests the number or it is required by law.
| Promulgated | | August 31, 2011 | October 31, 2011 | 87 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/2/2011 9:43 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 77(d) of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rules 3(b) and (c) of the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing | | The amendment to Rule 77(d) of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, as previously amended, is returned to its prior form to facilitate the development of a statewide practice of requiring court notices to be sent electronically pursuant to directives issued by the Court Administrator for specific units or divisions of the superior court as they develop the capacity for electronic delivery.
The amendments to Rules 3(b) and (c) of the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing facilitate the procedure for electronic delivery of court notices that will be rolled out by January 1, 2013.
There is also a simultaneous amendment to § 7 of A.O. 41, and the addition of A.O. Nos. 44 and 45.
| Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 103 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:31 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure 8(c), 16.3(g), 26, 56 and 69 and Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct 1.10 and its Comment and Comment [8] to Rule 1 | | The amendments to V.R.C. P. 8(c) and 56 conform those rules to recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. V.R.C.P. 26(b)(4)(A)(iii) was added to make clear that a retained or specially or regularly employed expert’s final report and supporting exhibits, if not protected by new subparagraph (C), may be obtained by an opposing party through a request for production or a subpoena duces tecum. The amendments to V.R.C.P. 26(b)(4)(B-)(E) were amended or added to adapt Vermont practice to December 2010 amendments of the federal rule. The amendment to V.R.C.P. 16.3(g) conforms the rule to provisions of the Uniform Mediation Act. The amendment to V.R.C.P. 69 provides for consistency with 12 V.S.A. § 506. An amendment to Rule 1.10 of the V.R.Pr.C. adapts a recent amendment to ABA Model Rule 1.10 to permit screening of lawyers joining a firm to avoid conflicts in certain matters. | Promulgated | | November 22, 2011 | January 23, 2012 | 89 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 13:09 |
| Emergency Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 80.1 of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure | | These emergency amendments promulgated on December 21, 2010, effective immediately, relate to foreclosure of mortgages and judgment liens. | Promulgated | | December 21, 2010 | December 21, 2010 | 73 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/28/2011 12:58 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to the Vermont Rules of Criminal Procedure | | The amendment to Rules 11(c) and (d) of the Vermont Rules of Criminal Procedure relates to pleas of guilty or nolo contendere in misdemeanor cases.
The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 16.2 follows revisions to the ABA Standards for Criminal Justice Discovery, Third Edition.
The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 26 increases to thirty days before trial the notice required of an intent to introduce evidence of other acts or offenses.
The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 30 contemplates that the court will have discretion to give preliminary instructions prior to the taking of evidence, as well as to give some instructions after the close of evidence, but prior to argument.
The amendments to V.R.Cr.P. 41, consistent with Administrative Order No. 43 issued on January 20, 2012, provide specific procedures for the timely filing of documents associated with the issuance, denial and execution of search warrants, and the returns and inventories required following execution.
The amendment to V.R.Cr.P. 44.2(c) provides consistency in treatment of withdrawal of counsel following entry of judgment of conviction, which occurs at time of sentencing pursuant to Rule 32(b).
| Promulgated | | March 12, 2013 | May 13, 2013 | 117 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/26/2013 13:35 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rules of Evidence 404(a)(1)(2) and 606(b) | | The amendments to Vermont Rules of Evidence 404(a)(1) and (2) relate to the admissibility of character evidence to prove conduct. The V.R.E. 606(b) amendment strikes language to make the rule easier to read and provides that juror testimony may be utilized to prove that the verdict reported was the result of a mistake in entering the verdict on the verdict form. | Promulgated | | October 25, 2011 | December 27, 2011 | 88 | | Deb Laferriere | 11/2/2011 8:53 |
| Order Promulgating Amendment to Rule 408 of Vermont Rules of Evidence | | These amendments to V.R.E. 408 generally make the Vermont rule consistent with its Federal counterpart. Vermont, however, declined to adopt the last clause of the federal rule and decided to retain the broader “claim or any other claim” language from the original V.R.E. These amendments are designed to promote uniformity of practice, make the rule easier to read, and clarify several important issues.
| Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 108 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:55 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 510 of the Vermont Rules of Evidence | | The amendments are based upon F.R.E. 502 adopted by Congress in 2008. The amendments harmonize state and federal practice. | Promulgated | | November 22, 2011 | January 23, 2012 | 90 | | Deb Laferriere | 11/30/2011 14:55 |
| Order Making Permanent & Further Amending the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing & Emergency Amendments to those Rules & Making Permanent Certain Emergency Amendments to the VRCP & VRAP & the Rules Governing Dissemination of Electronic Case Records | | The Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing, adopted as emergency rules on August 17, 2010, and emergency amendments to those Rules adopted on October 20, 2010, December 14, 2010, February 23, 2011, and March 22, 2011, have been made permanent and Rules 3(f) and 10(a) of those Rules have been further amended. | Promulgated | | August 31, 2011 | October 31, 2011 | 85 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/2/2011 9:39 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rules 4(b)(2)(A) and (B) and Rule 14(d) of the Vermont Rules for Family Proceedings | | This amendment to Rule 4(b)(2)(A) and (B) provides a method for waiver of service that is simpler to administer than that provided in V.R.C.P. 4(l), formerly incorporated in the Family Rules and to clarify the service provisions generally.
The amendment to Rule 14(d) adds “other good cause” to the grounds for waiver of attendance of a litigant education program that are to be incorporated in the terms of each such program. The amendment, requested by the Family Division Oversight Committee, is to give the court discretion to recognize valid grounds for nonattendance other than constitutional interests, disability, or vulnerability in a spousal or other relationship.
| Promulgated | | May 30, 2012 | July 30, 2012 | 107 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:43 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to the Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 5A(3) and Making Permanent Emergency Amendment of Section B fo A.O. 10, "Application of Code of Judicial Conduct" | | The amendment to Canon 5A(3) of the Vermont Code of Judicial Conduct is consistent with the language of 4 V.S.A. § 278(a), as added by Act 154 of 2009 (Adj. Sess.), § 17a, effective June 3, 2010, providing that an assistant judge or candidate for that office may run for the office of probate judge and, if elected to both offices, may serve in both.
The emergency amendment of Section B of the “Application of the Code of Judicial Conduct” portion of the Vermont Code of Judicial Conduct, Administrative Order No. 10 has been made permanent.
| Promulgated | | December 21, 2011 | February 20, 2012 | 93 | | Deb Laferriere | 12/22/2011 14:14 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 17(a) of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure | | These amendments provide consistency with the provisions of the Vermont Trust Code, 14A V.S.A. §§ 101-1204, enacted by Act 20 of 2009. | Promulgated | | November 22, 2011 | January 23, 2012 | 91 | | Deb Laferriere | 11/29/2011 15:40 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure | | The amendments to V.R.P.P. 3, 13, 60.1, 66, 67 and 80.6 conform the rules to the Vermont Trust Code, 14A V.S.A. §§ 101-1204, enacted by Act 20 of 2009, § 1.
The amendments to V.R.P.P. 13 conform the rule to 14 V.S.A. ch. 42, enacted by Act 55 of 2009, § 5, to replace 14 V.S.A., chs. 41-45.
Rule 80.6(a)(1) is amended to make it consistent with the 2011 amendment to Rule 84 which transfer the responsibility for form creation and approval to the Administrative Judge for Trial courts. The amendments to V.R.P.P. 80.6(a)(2) and (3) are amended to 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 the Department to appear if the petitioner is listed.
| Promulgated | | June 21, 2011 | August 22, 2011 | 84 | | Deb Laferriere | 11/2/2011 9:31 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to V.R.P.P. 4(e), 17(a) and 79.1 | | Rule 4(e) was amended by Act 144 of the 2011 (Adj. Sess.), effective May 15, 2012, to eliminate the requirement that notice by publication in a probate proceeding must be published in two successive weeks. This amendment to V.R.P.P. 4(e) requires only a single publication within 20 days after filing of the petition or granting of the order.
Rule 17(a)(1) was also amended by Act 144, effective May 15, 2012, to add subsection (b) providing that in a probate proceeding involving a decedent’s estate, “an interested party” need not be served under Rule 4 if the party cannot be located for other good cause based on a finding that not giving notice “serves the interests of justice and the efficient administration of the estate.” This amendment makes changes of form in the enacted amendment.
The amendment to V.R.P.P. 79.1 permits a lawyer acting pursuant to a limited representation agreement with a pro se client to enter a limited appearance in the Probate Division in certain specific situations.
The amendments to V.R.P.P. 4(e) and 17(a), promulgated on July 10, 2012, are effective immediately. The amendments to V.R.P.P. 79.1., also promulgated on July 10, 2012, are effective on September 10, 2012. | Promulgated | | July 10, 2012 | July 10, 2012 and September 10, 2012 | 110 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 11:54 |
| Order Making Permanent Emergency Amendments to Rules 5(g) and 84 of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure and the Abrogation of the Appendix of Forms to those Rules | | The emergency amendments to Rules 5(g) and 84 of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure and the Abrogation of the Appendix of Forms to those Rules have been made permanent. | Promulgated | | December 21, 2011 | February 20, 2012 | 95 | | Deb Laferriere | 1/4/2012 7:33 |
| Order Promulating Amendments to V.R.P.P. 64, 68 and 72 | | The amendment to Rule 64(a) of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure provides consistency with the amendment of V.R.P.P. 4(e) promulgated effective July 10, 2012, to conform to the amendment of that rule by Act 144 of 2011 (Adj. Sess.), § 1. The statute and the rule amendment eliminate the requirement of publication in two successive weeks in favor of a single publication. Notice to creditors under Rule 64(a) is to be published as provided in amended V.R.P.P. 4(e) unless notice has previously been given.
The amendment to V.R.P.P. 68 conforms the rule to Act No. 78 of 2011 (Adj. Sess.), § 2, eff. April 2, 2012, which renamed the Department of Banking, Insurance, Securities and Health Care Administration as the Department of Financial Regulation.
The amendments to V.R.P.P. 72 provide a uniform procedure for enforcement of probate division orders by contempt proceedings.
| Promulgated | | March 12, 2013 | May 13, 2013 | 118 | | Deb Laferriere | 3/26/2013 13:36 |
| Order Promulgating Amendments to Rule 80.3 of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure | | Rules 80.3(a)-(d) of the Vermont Rules of Probate Procedure are amended for clarity and for consistency with other provisions of the rules and the amendments to 14 V.S.A. §§ 1901-1903 enacted by Act No. 75 of 2009 (Adj. Sess.). That legislation simplified the requirements of inventory, eliminated the requirement of sureties and gave the court discretion as to the amount of the bond for the payment of funeral expenses, and added a finding of a surviving parent or parents but no spouse or child to the circumstances in which the court may grant administration and issue letters without further notice or bond.
Subdivision (h) was added to formalize and make uniform the affidavit procedure that is used in many probate courts.
| Promulgated | | August 28, 2012 | October 29, 2012 | 113 | | Deb Laferriere | 9/12/2012 14:35 |
| Proposed Amendment to Comment 3 to Rule 4.1 of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct | | Proposed Comment [3] would be added to Rule 4.1 to address concerns expressed by government lawyers that the Supreme Court’s decision in In re PRB Docket No. 2007-046, 2009 VT 115, 187 Vt. 35, 989 A.2d 523, might be understood as affecting the traditional use of deception as an investigative mechanism in the enforcement of criminal or other laws.
The comment period ended on August 26, 2011. | Proposed | | | | 27 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 8:56 |
| Proposed Amendments to V.R.F.P. 7, 7.1 and 9 | | The proposed amendment abrogates current Rule 7 of the Vermont Rules for Family Proceedings, applicable to appointment of guardians ad litem (GALs) and attorneys for minors in proceedings under Rules 4 and 9, and replaces the rule with a revised Rule 7 intended to address issues that have arisen under the original rule.
Proposed Rule 7.1 would be added simultaneously with the adoption of significant revisions to Rule 7. The purpose is to make clear the different circumstances that govern appointment of a guardian ad litem for a child, not a subject of the proceedings, who is to testify.
The proposed amendment to Rule 9 would add a new section that provides that a petition for relief of a vulnerable adult, as defined in 33 V.S.A. § 6902(14), from abuse, neglect, or exploitation may be filed either by the vulnerable adult or by an “interested person” on the vulnerable adult’s behalf.
The comment period ended on May 21, 2012. | Proposed | | | | 42 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:38 |
| Proposed Emergency Amendment to Rule 30 of the Vermont Rules of Appellate Procedure | | The proposed emergency amendments to Rule 30(b), (d), and (f) provide that in cases without an electronic case file, a litigant must file eight paper copies and an electronic copy of the printed case, supplemental printed case, and exhibits. The temporary rule which is set to expire on June 30, 2013, allows the filing of only one paper copy of the printed case which proved to be insufficient for the needs of the Court.
The proposed emergency amendment to Rule 30(a) requires the sequential numbering of the printed case to begin on the cover sheet. This will make the page references consistent with the electronic pagination. The proposed emergency amendment to Rule 30(c) clarifies that in cases with an electronic case file, litigants may file a printed case, but are not required to do so.
Comments on this proposed emergency amendment should be sent by June 8, 2013 to Kinvin Wroth, the Reporter of the Civil Rules Committee. He can be reached by e-mail or U.S. mail at the following addresses:
| Proposed | June 7, 2013 | | | 52 | Professor L. Kinvin Wroth Vermont Law School Chelsea Street South Royalton, VT 05068 kwroth@vermontlaw.edu | Deb Laferriere | 5/9/2013 11:34 |
| Proposed MCLE Amendments | | Since the institution of the requirement of continuing legal education for attorneys admitted to practice law in Vermont, separate rules and regulations have governed. These rules and regulations defined the minimal educational requirement, how they could be met, and the process a sponsoring agency must follow in order to offer courses for CLE credit, among other things. The rules often overlapped with the regulations, and some topics were discussed in both the rules and regulations. This created an often cumbersome process for attorneys seeking information on the requirements for continuing legal education. There is no distinction to be made between the rules and regulations, as the Vermont Supreme Court must approve of and administer both. Therefore, the Board of Mandatory Continuing Legal Education has consolidated the rules and regulations into one document, the Rules for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education. There have been no substantive changes to the rules or regulations during this rewrite. The proposed change has been made in an effort to achieve simplicity and for the convenience of those governed by the rules.
Comments on these proposed amendments should be sent by July 2, 2013 to the Hon. Karen Carroll, the Chair of the Mandatory Legal Education Board. She can be reached by e-mail or U.S. mail at the following addresses:
| Proposed | July 2, 2013 | | | 51 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 8:58 |
| Proposed Restyled Vermont Rules of Appellate Procedure | | The proposed restyled V.R.A.P. adopts the format and approach of the restyled Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure adopted in 1998. The restyling is not intended to change the meaning of any rule but is intended to provide a more accessible format for the rules and to simplify them by eliminating ambiguous or archaic language and adopting a more straightforward style. The proposed rules are displayed in a side-by-side table with the current rule on the left and the proposed rule on the right. A few substantive changes in connection with the proposed restyling are delineated in II.(d) of this memo.
The comment period ended April 12, 2013. | Proposed | | | | 49 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 8:56 |
| Proposed Amendments to V.R.A.P. 5(b), 6, 10(b)(5), 12(a), 12(b)(1) and 12(c), | | The following amendments are proposed for adoption in connection with the proposed restyled appellate rules.
The proposed amendment to Rule 5(b)(5) eliminates language that is redundant to Rule 5(b)(1)-(4), which contains the requirements for filing an interlocutory appeal in different types of cases. The proposed amendment also eliminates a statement in Rule 5(b)(8)(A) that is not necessary since the Court has discretion to dismiss an interlocutory appeal that was improvidently granted.
The proposed amendment to Rule 6 provides a procedure for appeals from final judgments where permission to appeal must be obtained from the trial court or the Supreme Court.
The proposed amendment to Rule 10(b)(5) deletes a phrase which is unnecessary because Rule 33(a) already contains a procedure for prehearing conferences, which the parties are free to adapt.
The proposed amendment to Rule 12(a) specifies that the Supreme Court docket clerk must receive a copy of the certified docket entries from the trial court before docketing an appeal. The proposed amendments to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(c) removes the requirement that the Supreme Court clerk receive the record before notifying the parties that record is complete in cases where no transcript is ordered.
The proposed amendment to Rule 28(j) requires parties to file eight copies of any supplemental authority for conformity with the number of briefs required to be filed by Rule 31(b).
The proposed amendment to Rule 33(a)(1) reflects the reality that self-represented parties may also be directed to appear for a prehearing conference.
The proposed amendment to Rule 34(b) requires a request for additional time to be made by motion rather than in a letter addressed to the clerk.
The proposed amendment deletes Rule 39(c)(4) because Rule 31(b) no longer requires the filing of an original brief, requiring merely eight copies. The price per folio is a term no longer used.
The proposed amendment to Rule 40(a) provides a time limit for filing a request to extend the period for filing a motion to reargue. In addition, because the prior page-limit in Rule 40(b)(2) was changed to a word-count limit, the parties must now certify compliance with the word-count limit similar to the existing requirement in Rule 32(a)(7)(D).
The proposed amendment to Rule 45.1 recognizes that self-represented parties will not necessarily have an e-mail address, but requires attorneys to provide an e-mail address.
The comment period ended April 12, 2013. | Proposed | | | | 50 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 8:58 |
| Proposed Search Warrant Return and Inventory Form | | In conjunction with the proposed amendments to V.R.Cr.P. 41, the Committee proposes the adoption of a Search Warrant and Return and Inventory Form.
The comment period ended on May 21, 2012. | Proposed | | | | 39 | | Deb Laferriere | 8/15/2012 12:40 |
| Proposed Amendments to V.R.F.P. (1)(b)(1)-(2), 2(b)(2), 4(b)(1)(A), and 8(g) | | The proposed amendment to V.R.F.P. 1(b)(1) requires that the petition in a delinquency proceeding be supplemented by factual data concerning the race/ethnicity of the child who is the subject of the proceeding. The proposed amendment provides that the facts to be presented are those contained in the Law Enforcement Juvenile Data Sheet, Form 101.
The proposed amendments to V.R.F.P. 1(b)(2) and 2(b)(2) substitute references to § 1079 of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act for references to similar references to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Acts which was repealed.
In light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Samis v. Samis, 2011 VT 21, ¶¶ 10-17, 189 Vt. 434, 22 A.3d 444, the proposed amendment to V.R.F.P. 4(b)(1)(A) substitutes more specific language for the general language of the present rule that allows a divorce action to be brought by a “guardian, guardian ad litem , or next friend” for a plaintiff who is not “of sound mind and of the age of 16 years.”
The proposed amendment to V.R.F.P. 8(g) eliminates the requirement that the provisions of V.R.A.P. 10-12 concerning notice of completion of the record apply in an appeal from a magistrate’s decision to the Family Division.
The comment period ended April 12, 2013. | Proposed | | | | 47 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 8:59 |
| Proposed Amendments to V.R.S.C.P. 3, 7, 8 and 13 | | The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 3(b) simplifies the rule by substituting a single 30-day response time for the answer and eliminating the acknowledgement provisions under which a defendant was allowed an additional 20 days to answer after filing an acknowledgement that the summons and complaint had been received.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 3(d) clarifies that an answer is due either within 30 days of the date of mailing of the summons and complaint or within 30 days of service by the sheriff.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 3(e) and the addition of 3(h) address the complexities that may arise in credit card debt collection actions by requiring the plaintiff creditor to establish the existence of the debt and ownership of it.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 3(e) requires that a motion for default in a credit card must be accompanied by signed evidence of the debt or, in the absence of such documentation, a credit card statement showing the debt, “or other competent evidence” of it.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 7(d) eliminates the requirement that the judgment creditor serve an order resulting from a financial disclosure hearing by sheriff. The change allows this service to be accomplished by first class mail.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 8(c), regarding the consequences of a debtor failing to appear at a contempt hearing, eliminates the word “ordinarily” and substitutes the word “may,” recognizing that it is fully within the court’s discretion to decide what any penalty should be.
The proposed amendment to V.R.S.C.P. 13 makes clear that, although V.R.C.P. 11 does not apply to small claims proceedings of its own force by virtue of V.R.S.C.P. 1(a), it may be used by analogy in a proper case when a party’s pleadings, motions, or other written submissions are calculated to impede the purpose of the Small Claims Rules to secure “a simple, informal, and inexpensive disposition of” the claim.
The comment period ended April 12, 2013. | Proposed | | | | 48 | | Deb Laferriere | 4/30/2013 9:00 |