mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- Citation
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- Parent Document
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- Jurisdiction
- Vermont (state)
- Effective Date
- 2025-07-16
- Original Source
- https://www.vermontjudiciary.org/media/19222 ↗
Other Sections in This Document (24)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
- mtc vt v warner, No. 25-cv-1707 (Vt. Super. Ct. 2025)
Full Text
480 chars2 Trial courts are free to “consider three-justice decisions from [the Vermont Supreme] Court for their persuasive value, even though such decisions are not controlling precedent.” Washburn v. Fowlkes, Docket No. 2015-089, 2015 WL 4771613, at *3 (Vt. Aug. 2015) (unpub. mem.) (citing V.R.A.P. 33.1(d), which provides that an “unpublished decision by a three-justice panel may be cited as persuasive authority but is not controlling precedent,” except under limited circumstances).