Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1041 - 1050 of 60998 for quit claim deed/1000.
Search results 1041 - 1050 of 60998 for quit claim deed/1000.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, the shares were valued at $1000 each unless and until they were later revalued pursuant to specific terms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=111479 - 2017-09-21
, the shares were valued at $1000 each unless and until they were later revalued pursuant to specific terms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=111479 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
in paragraph 8 ….” Under paragraph 8, the shares were valued at $1000 each unless and until they were later
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111479 - 2014-05-05
in paragraph 8 ….” Under paragraph 8, the shares were valued at $1000 each unless and until they were later
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111479 - 2014-05-05
[PDF]
because there was no quit claim deed prepared reserving a life estate in the house for Kuenzi
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=969448 - 2025-06-12
because there was no quit claim deed prepared reserving a life estate in the house for Kuenzi
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=969448 - 2025-06-12
[PDF]
NOTICE
County should not have dismissed his petition; and (3) he is entitled to receive $1000 from two judges
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=61892 - 2014-09-15
County should not have dismissed his petition; and (3) he is entitled to receive $1000 from two judges
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=61892 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
in Milwaukee County should not have dismissed his petition; and (3) he is entitled to receive $1000 from two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=61892 - 2011-03-28
in Milwaukee County should not have dismissed his petition; and (3) he is entitled to receive $1000 from two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=61892 - 2011-03-28
State v. Samuel D. Clay
§ 161.49, Stats., because the offense took place within 1000 feet of a youth center. He raises issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9431 - 2005-03-31
§ 161.49, Stats., because the offense took place within 1000 feet of a youth center. He raises issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9431 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Samuel D. Clay
§ 161.49, STATS., because the offense took place within 1000 feet of a No. 95-2048-CR -2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9431 - 2017-09-19
§ 161.49, STATS., because the offense took place within 1000 feet of a No. 95-2048-CR -2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9431 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Fredric P. Spindler v. Bonita B. Spindler
by deed. The title remains in Fredric’s name. Fredric testified that they have done no major
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10451 - 2017-09-20
by deed. The title remains in Fredric’s name. Fredric testified that they have done no major
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10451 - 2017-09-20
Fredric P. Spindler v. Bonita B. Spindler
held the remaining interests and gifted the cottage to him by deed. The title remains in Fredric’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10451 - 2005-03-31
held the remaining interests and gifted the cottage to him by deed. The title remains in Fredric’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10451 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Lyn and Stephen Sills v. Walworth County Land Management Committee
and the landowners claimed that the ordinance governed instead No. 01-0901 15 of the deed restriction. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3801 - 2017-09-20
and the landowners claimed that the ordinance governed instead No. 01-0901 15 of the deed restriction. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3801 - 2017-09-20