Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 11151 - 11160 of 45549 for even.

COURT OF APPEALS
of efficient judicial administration allows this court to affirm proper decisions by the trial court, even when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35010 - 2008-12-22

Richard Herbert Voigt v. City of Merrill
, we will not upset a jury verdict if there is any credible evidence to support it, “even though
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4304 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Larry A. Peterson
the case with his wife on the evening before the last day of trial. ¶4 Before the third trial began
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7081 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
’ for purposes of claim preclusion even if it had been based on ‘procedural grounds.’” The Town contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=350865 - 2021-03-30

State v. Tyler J. Kingsfield
, an appellate court may not overturn a verdict even if it believes that the trier of fact should not have found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3294 - 2005-03-31

City of Watertown v. Brent A. Genz
arrests for OWI. Officer Zastrow testified that while on routine patrol late one evening he observed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14963 - 2005-03-31

Bronsteatter & Sons, Inc. v. American Growers Insurance Company
] Even if the distinction were legally relevant, Bronsteatter’s argument hinges on the same premise we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19126 - 2005-08-30

[PDF] NOTICE
that a 2 The officer’s testimony is not clear on this point, but, even if I assume the officer’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45733 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] City of Oconomowoc v. Christopher E. Verburgt
need not even reach the No. 01-1334 5 level that guilt is more likely than not. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3971 - 2017-09-20

COURT OF APPEALS
.’” Id. (citation omitted). We cannot perform even a cursory review of the hearing examiner’s decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58975 - 2011-01-18