Bjornberg v. Powell

733 A.2d 84, 169 Vt. 586, 1999 Vt. LEXIS 201
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided June 1, 1999·No. No. 99-181·Published

Opinions

Because the issues defendant seeks to have reviewed do not make this one of those rare cases in which extraordinary relief is an appropriate means for challenging a pretrial discovery order on the ground that the trial court abused its discretion, defendant’s petition for extraordinary relief is denied. See Chrysler Corp. v. Makovec, 157 Vt. 84, 88-89, 596 A.2d 1284, 1287 (1991); Monti v. State, 151 Vt. 609, 611, 563 A.2d 629, 630 (1989). Further, because defendant has failed to demonstrate that the superior court abused its discretion in denying permission to appeal, defendant’s request for interlocutory appeal is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bjornberg v. Powell, 733 A.2d 84, 169 Vt. 586, 1999 Vt. LEXIS 201 (Vt. 1999).

733 A.2d 84 (Bjornberg v. Powell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ley v. Dall
553 A.2d 562 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1988)
Monti v. State
563 A.2d 629 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1989)
Chrysler Corp. v. Makovec
596 A.2d 1284 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1991)
Castle v. SHERBURNE CORPORATION
446 A.2d 350 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1982)
In re J.G.
627 A.2d 362 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1993)