Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 10531 - 10540 of 59747 for quit claim deed/1000.
Search results 10531 - 10540 of 59747 for quit claim deed/1000.
[PDF]
Lloyd Stunkel v. Price Electric Cooperative
. Lloyd and Lorraine Stunkel appeal a judgment dismissing their claim against Price Electric Cooperative
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14545 - 2017-09-21
. Lloyd and Lorraine Stunkel appeal a judgment dismissing their claim against Price Electric Cooperative
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14545 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
for a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his claims are procedurally barred. He also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=121638 - 2014-09-16
for a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his claims are procedurally barred. He also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=121638 - 2014-09-16
[PDF]
NOTICE
. The court then construed the ineffective-assistance claims as alleging ineffective assistance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60037 - 2014-09-15
. The court then construed the ineffective-assistance claims as alleging ineffective assistance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60037 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
(2009-10).[1] Because Adell’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is procedurally barred and his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70527 - 2011-09-06
(2009-10).[1] Because Adell’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is procedurally barred and his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70527 - 2011-09-06
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Kelly S. Kincaid. Based upon our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=943969 - 2025-04-22
order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Kelly S. Kincaid. Based upon our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=943969 - 2025-04-22
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Kelly S. Kincaid. Based upon our review
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=943969 - 2025-04-22
order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Kelly S. Kincaid. Based upon our review
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=943969 - 2025-04-22
COURT OF APPEALS
of claim preclusion. Deering also appears to challenge the circuit court’s decision to strike the first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72142 - 2011-10-11
of claim preclusion. Deering also appears to challenge the circuit court’s decision to strike the first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72142 - 2011-10-11
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
his original complaint as barred under the doctrine of claim preclusion. Deering also appears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72142 - 2014-09-15
his original complaint as barred under the doctrine of claim preclusion. Deering also appears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72142 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
point took responsibility for the Hertrampfs’ claim; and (3) Grange conspired with Integrity to harm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=355196 - 2021-04-15
point took responsibility for the Hertrampfs’ claim; and (3) Grange conspired with Integrity to harm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=355196 - 2021-04-15
COURT OF APPEALS
-assistance claims as alleging ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel, consistent with State ex rel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60037 - 2011-02-14
-assistance claims as alleging ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel, consistent with State ex rel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60037 - 2011-02-14