Rule 79.Books and records kept by the clerk

Reporter’s Notes—2020 Amendment: Rule 79(a)(1) is removed because the custodian of records is now controlled by Vermont Rules for Public Access to Court Records 3(c), effective July 1, 2019.

Reporter’s Notes—2014 Amendment: Rule 79(b) is abrogated and Rule 79(c) is amended in light of the elimination of record-keeping requirements by Act 67 of 2013.

Reporter’s Notes—2011 Amendment: See Reporter’s Notes to simultaneous amendment making the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing permanent.

Reporter’s Notes—2010 Amendment: Rules 4(b), ( l)(3); 5(b), (e), (f); 6(a), (e); 10(d); 11(a), (b); 26(g); 40(a), (b); 45(a)(1)(G); 77(c), (d); 79(a)(1), (2); 79.1(g) of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure rules are amended or added to conform to the Vermont Rules for Electronic Filing as adopted by simultaneous emergency amendment. See Reporter’s Notes to those rules.

Reporter’s Notes—2002 Amendment: Rules 79(a) and (d) are amended to eliminate provision for the separate grouping of divorce cases on the civil docket. This provision was rendered obsolete by the transfer of the divorce jurisdiction to the Family Court by Act No. 221 of 1990, adding 4 V.S.A., ch. 10. The amendment conforms to current practice by providing for the separate grouping of small claims cases. Other changes delete obsolete language.

Reporter’s Notes—1986 Amendment: This rule is amended to simplify record-keeping in the Superior Court.

Reporter’s Notes—1982 Amendment: Rule 79(a) is amended, at the request of the superior court clerks, to modify the requirements on the content of docket entries. The former language required the entries to contain “the substance of each order or judgment of the court.” In most counties, the clerks are not lawyers and cannot always reduce a long or complicated order to its “substance” without risking the omission of important parts. As a result, they have been going through the time- consuming process of copying onto the docket folios entire orders or judgments. The amendment alleviates some of the burden on clerks by eliminating the requirement of entering the substance of each order or judgment and adding a requirement that the “subject matter” of each paper filed be entered. The new language creates a lesser burden but does not eliminate all specificity. For example, if the court issued an injunction to abate a public nuisance and described in detail the activity enjoined, an entry of “order issued” or “injunction order issued” would not comply. However, an entry like “injunction order issued restraining x from conducting certain activities which have been found to be a public nuisance” probably would comply. The chief beneficiary of docket entries is the trial judge who, under the rotation system, is often hearing some aspect of a case after another trial judge has issued some order in the case. Intelligible and complete docket entries enable the judge to quickly understand what has occurred and find any critical documents in the file. The Court Administrator should use the opportunity of the rule change to train clerk’s office personnel on making sufficient entries to meet the needs of the trial judges. The amendment is incorporated by reference into D.C.C.R. 79.

Reporter’s Notes—1980 Amendment: Subdivision (e) is amended by adding the word “dockets” to make clear that additional dockets shall be maintained if ordered. A reference to the Administrative Judge, whose duties include determining the desirability of additional books, dockets, and records, is also added. See A.O. No. 18, 12 V.S.A. App. VIII.

Reporter’s Notes: This rule is similar to Federal Rule 79 but incorporates provisions of the former County Court Rules. Rule 79(a) adds to the provisions of the federal rule the requirement based on former County Court Rule 2.1 that a separate divorce docket be maintained. The requirement of that rule for a criminal docket is not carried forward because the matter will be dealt with in the Rules of Criminal Procedure. A separate chancery docket is, of course, no longer required, but the final sentence of the subdivision provides that jury cases are to be separately identified on the docket when a demand for trial by jury is made in accordance with Rule 38. The provision for a miscellaneous docket is intended to take care of special cases such as appeals. Rules 79(b) and (c), based on the federal rule, are consistent with the requirements of 4 V.S.A. §§ 602(1), (3), 606. For discussion of the hearing and progress calendars, see Reporter’s Notes to Rule 40(a). Rules 79(d) and (e) incorporate by reference applicable provisions of 4 V.S.A. §§ 602, 604- 608. The provision of subdivision (d) for temporary loan of papers to counsel upon receipt is similar to former County Court Rule 35. See Appellate Rule 45(b), (d). The final sentence of Rule 79(d) is taken verbatim from former County Court Rule 55.