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
603 charsAt the beginning of their lease term in June 2023, Tenant and his housemates gave Landlord a security deposit of $5,700. When the tenants vacated in May 2024, Landlord deducted $3,666.16 for various damage and repairs, returning just $2,035.46.' Tenant does not dispute all the amounts that were withheld, but he asserts that Landlord charged an excessive amount for painting and repairs and that Landlord should have refunded Tenant and his housemates a total of $3,589.57, which is an additional $1,554.11. The Court has reviewed the record before the Board and has listened to the evidence presented.