In a 2018 decision, this Court agreed, reversing and remanding the case for further proceedings. Daiello v. Town of Vernon, 2018 VT 17, ¶ 1, 207 Vt. 139, 184 A.3d 1192. The western-access issue was straightforward-in the 2010 decision, the Court did not review the superior court's finding regarding western access, so landowner was not precluded from relitigating that issue.

However, because we are without jurisdiction to review the CHINS adjudication, none of the issues resolved therein can have preclusive effect. See Daiello v. Town of Vernon, 2018 VT 17, ¶¶ 15-16, 207 Vt. 139, 184 A.3d 1192 (holding that collateral estoppel cannot be applied "with respect to any finding that was untested on appellate review" because "a factual issue cannot, consistent with the statutory right to appellate review, be said to have been finally adjudicated when the appellant has been precluded from obtaining the appellate review which he sought and to which he would have been entitled if the fact had been material" (quotation omitted)); 18 C. Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 4421 (3d ed. 2023) (setting forth "general principle that an appellate disposition on grounds that foreclose review of other grounds defeats use of the unreviewed grounds for preclusion"). As a result, parents have not shown a "direct link" between the adjudication and the possibility of substantiation.

"No single test is determinative as to the last two criteria, which must be considered on a case-by-case basis." Daiello v. Town of Vernon, 2018 VT 17, ¶ 13, 207 Vt. 139, 184 A.3d 1192. Some factors to be weighed "are the type of issue preclusion, the choice of forum, the incentive to litigate, the foreseeability of future litigation, the legal standards and burdens employed in each action, the procedural opportunities available in each forum, and the existence of inconsistent determinations of the same issue in separate prior cases." Trepanier, 155 Vt. at 265, 583 A.2d at 587.