LaFlamme v. Church

Full title: Ferdinand O. LaFlamme v. Joyce Church

Court: Supreme Court of Vermont

Date published: Jun 10, 1983

465 A.2d 268 (Vt. 1983)

465 A.2d 268

Opinion

No. 82-284

Opinion Filed June 10, 1983

1. Appeal and Error — Evidence — Tests and Standards

When the evidence is conflicting the credibility of the witnesses, the weight of the evidence, and its persuasive effect are questions for the trier of fact, and its determination must stand if supported by credible evidence even though there may be inconsistencies or substantial evidence to the contrary.

2. Appeal and Error — Evidence — Sufficiency of Evidence

In small claims action to collect money allegedly owed from a loan made to defendant, who insisted that the loan had been paid back in full in the form of cash and small purchases for plaintiff, where the parties were the only witnesses at the hearing and their evidence was completely conflicting, since review of the record revealed sufficient evidence to support the judgment for defendant, it would be affirmed.

Appeal from judgment for defendant in small claims action to collect money allegedly owed. District Court, Unit No. 1, Bennington Circuit, Wolchik, J., presiding. Affirmed.

Ferdinand O. LaFlamme, pro se, Bennington, Plaintiff-Appellant.

Joyce Church, pro se, Eagle Bridge, New York, Defendant-Appellee.

Present: Billings, C.J., Hill, Underwood, Peck and Gibson, JJ.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff brought this small claims action seeking to collect $500 allegedly owed him from a previous loan made to defendant. At hearing, defendant acknowledged the $500 loan, but insisted that the loan had been paid back in full in the form of cash and small purchases for plaintiff. The parties were the only witnesses at the hearing, and their testimony was completely conflicting. After hearing, the court found for defendant, and plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm.

We have consistently held that "[w]hen the evidence is conflicting the credibility of the witnesses, the weight of the evidence, and its persuasive effect are questions for the trier of fact, and its determination must stand if supported by credible evidence even though there may be inconsistencies or substantial evidence to the contrary." Concra Corp. v. Andrus, 141 Vt. 169, 173, 446 A.2d 363, 365 (1982); Stamato v. Quazzo, 139 Vt. 155, 158, 423 A.2d 1201, 1203 (1980).

Our review of the record reveals sufficient credible evidence to support the judgment of the trial court. Accordingly, it must be affirmed.

Affirmed.