George v. Timberlake Associates

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• discussing concern “that organs of municipal government not take actions that tend to “bury” decisions so that interested parties lose their appeal rights.”
• “[a]lthough a zoning applicant can appeal from an oral decision, that decision does not become final and the appeal period does not begin to run until either the board files its written decision or the period for doing so … has expired.” (quoting In re White, 155 Vt. 612, 615 (1990)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Appeal of Gulli
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2002-11-04· cited 55×
• In Re Appeal of Miller
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 1999-10-08· cited 33×
• Mahar CU
  Vermont Superior Court· 2016-07-13
• Geddes PUD
  Vermont Superior Court· 2010-04-20
• New Cengular Wireless, dba AT&T Sousa Telecommunications
  Vermont Superior Court· 2009-12-30
• New Cingular Wireless dba AT&T Sousa Telecommunications Permit
  Vermont Superior Court· 2009-12-14
• Fadial CU Appeal - Decision on Motion
  Vermont Superior Court· 2025-03-26

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Spencer v. Killington, Ltd.
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 1997-03-14· cited 23×