With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". S.Ct. 1011, 1019-20, 39 L.Ed.2d 147 (1974) (finding legislative history showed clear congressional intent to allow an individual to pursue state law remedies simultaneously with Title VII). Congress plainly did not intend to . Res., 232 Wis.2d 217, 607 N.W.2d 50, 54 (Wis. Ct. App. 1999) (“It is blackletter law that an opinion does not establish binding precedent for an issue, if that issue was neither contested nor decided.”). An uncoritested statement of law is not entitled to stare decisis. See, e.g., Hemingway, 734 F.3d at 335; Goldberger, 209 F.3d at 49; Berger, 268 N.W.2d at 635; Fulton, 108 N.W.2d at 317. Instead, the agreed upon legal principle is law of the case binding on the parties in the event of retrial, but nothing more. State v. Ragland, 812 N.W.2d 654, 658 (Iowa 2012) (<HOLDING>); accord State ex rel. Goettsch v. Diacide

A: holding settled legal principles are binding on litigants throughout future progress of case
B: holding that a judgment on appeal constitutes the law of the case as to particular issues decided and is applicable throughout subsequent stages of the case
C: holding that stipulations involving questions of law are not binding on the court
D: holding that arbitration award is binding on the parties
A.