Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 18 Chapter 181
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(Cite as: 18 V.S.A. § 7627)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 2002–2017 · leading case: In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). · cites it 7× “preference! ] regarding medication” under 18 V.S.A. § 7627(b). We conclude that the trial court’s findings support its conclusion under § 7625, but agree that the trial court did not squarely address patient’s argument under § 7627 in its findings.”
In re G.G., 2017 VT 10 (Vt. 2017). · cites it 2× “was a patient being held by the State under an order of hospitalization, that he was refusing medication, and that he was not competent to decide whether to take the medication and then applied the seven statutory factors from 18 V.S.A. § 7627. G.G. appeals. 2 I. Right to…”
In re L.A., 912 A.2d 977 (Vt. 2006). · cites it 2× “” The court analyzed patient’s RLUIPA argument concurrently with its analysis of patient’s “religious convictions” — one of the factors the court was required to consider after finding patient incompetent, but before ordering involuntary medication — under 18 V.S.A. §…”
J.L. v. Miller, 817 A.2d 1 (Vt. 2002). “18 V.S.A § 7627(e). Those factors are similar to those considered under the J.”
Hargrave v. Vermont, 340 F.3d 27 (2d Cir. 2003). “In so holding, we do not suggest that Act 114 would necessarily accord with the ADA if it pertained to all the civilly committed, rather than only those committed individuals who have been found mentally ill.”
In re L.A., 2008 VT 5 (Vt. 2008). “” 18 V.S.A. § 7627(f). The plain language of the rule prevents the commissioner, pending appeal, from carrying out the order by administering the medication.”
In Re La, 2006 VT 118 (Vt. 2006). · cites it 2× “" The court analyzed patient's RLUIPA argument concurrently with its analysis of patient's "religious convictions" — one of the factors the court was required to consider after finding patient incompetent, but before ordering involuntary medication — under 18 V.S.A. §…”
In re J.R. (Vt. 2013). · cites it 2× “, 2006 VT 118, ¶ 8 ; see 18 V.S.A. § 7627(c) (listing factors). On appeal, J.”
In re J.P. (Vt. 2015). “Applying the factors set forth in 18 V.S.A. § 7627(c), the court found that, although J.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(b) — 2 cases
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). “preference! ] regarding medication” under 18 V.S.A. § 7627(b). We conclude that the trial court’s findings support its conclusion under § 7625, but agree that the trial court did not squarely address patient’s argument under § 7627 in its findings.”
In re G.G., 2017 VT 10 (Vt. 2017). “was a patient being held by the State under an order of hospitalization, that he was refusing medication, and that he was not competent to decide whether to take the medication and then applied the seven statutory factors from 18 V.S.A. § 7627. G.G. appeals. 2 I. Right to…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(c) — 3 cases
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). “preference! ] regarding medication” under 18 V.S.A. § 7627(b). We conclude that the trial court’s findings support its conclusion under § 7625, but agree that the trial court did not squarely address patient’s argument under § 7627 in its findings.”
In re J.P. (Vt. 2015). “Applying the factors set forth in 18 V.S.A. § 7627(c), the court found that, although J.”
In re J.R. (Vt. 2013). “, 2006 VT 118, ¶ 8 ; see 18 V.S.A. § 7627(c) (listing factors). On appeal, J.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(c)(1) — 2 cases
In re L.A., 912 A.2d 977 (Vt. 2006). “” The court analyzed patient’s RLUIPA argument concurrently with its analysis of patient’s “religious convictions” — one of the factors the court was required to consider after finding patient incompetent, but before ordering involuntary medication — under 18 V.S.A. §…”
In Re La, 2006 VT 118 (Vt. 2006). “" The court analyzed patient's RLUIPA argument concurrently with its analysis of patient's "religious convictions" — one of the factors the court was required to consider after finding patient incompetent, but before ordering involuntary medication — under 18 V.S.A. §…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(d) — 2 cases
In re I.G., 2016 VT 95 (Vt. 2016). “preference! ] regarding medication” under 18 V.S.A. § 7627(b). We conclude that the trial court’s findings support its conclusion under § 7625, but agree that the trial court did not squarely address patient’s argument under § 7627 in its findings.”
In re J.R. (Vt. 2013). “, 2006 VT 118, ¶ 8 ; see 18 V.S.A. § 7627(c) (listing factors). On appeal, J.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(e) — 1 case
J.L. v. Miller, 817 A.2d 1 (Vt. 2002). “18 V.S.A § 7627(e). Those factors are similar to those considered under the J.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 18, § 7627(f) — 1 case
In re L.A., 2008 VT 5 (Vt. 2008). “” 18 V.S.A. § 7627(f). The plain language of the rule prevents the commissioner, pending appeal, from carrying out the order by administering the medication.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.