Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 10151 - 10160 of 64175 for judgment for ms.

Daniel A. Olson v. Correll, Inc.
, Correll, Inc. and Correll's insurer, appeal from a summary judgment dismissing Olson's complaint against
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11457 - 2005-03-31

Christopher Mueller v. Gerald Miller
. APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Dunn County: JAMES A. WENDLAND, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10823 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Victor Spanbauer
-APPELLANT. APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Richland County: KENT C. HOUCK
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12219 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] HMO-W Incorporated v. SSM Health Care System
and CROSS-APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Sauk County: JAMES EVENSON, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4804 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] Ricki A. Ritt v. Dental Care Associates
. APPEAL from a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Marquette County: WILLIAM MCMONIGAL, Judge
/ca/errata/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8404 - 2017-09-19

Ricki A. Ritt v. Dental Care Associates
. APPEAL from a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Marquette County: WILLIAM MCMONIGAL, Judge
/ca/errata/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8404 - 2005-03-31

Bernard G. Manske v. Royal Bank
. VERGERONT, J. Bernard and Luella Manske appeal the trial court order granting summary judgment in favor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13714 - 2005-03-31

Kevin Kirsch v. Pat Siedschlag
under ยง 806.07(1)(h), Stats., which permits a court to set aside a judgment or an order for "any other
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10414 - 2005-03-31

Michael F. Mullen v. Cedar River Lumber Company
, Defendants-Respondents. APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Marinette
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3284 - 2005-03-31

State v. Larry G. Edwards
. The circuit court denied the motion for reconsideration, ruling that its original judgment was with prejudice
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16577 - 2005-03-31