Skip to main content

In re C.K.

Citations

  • 156 Vt. 194
  • 591 A.2d 57
  • 1991 Vt. LEXIS 66

How courts have described this case

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

  • denying review for rulings in preliminary stages of CHINS process “absent grounds for extraordinary relief”
  • even when challenged order meets all three criteria of rule, V.R.A.P. 5.1 does not entitle moving party to review of order
  • standard for review of court’s denial of motion to appeal under V.R.A.P. 5.1 is whether court abused or withheld its discretion
  • even when challenged order meets all three criteria of rule, V.R.A.P. 5.1 does not entitle moving party to review of order
  • standard for review of court's denial of motion to appeal under V.R.A.P. 5.1 is whether court abused or withheld its discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Allen, Dooley, Gibson, Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.