Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 11431 - 11440 of 73032 for we.

Shirley Krug v. Cathy S. Zeuske
. Before Eich, C.J., Gartzke, P.J., and Dykman, J. EICH, C.J. We hold in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8336 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
held, then there are issues of material fact that preclude declaratory judgment. ¶3 We conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=122978 - 2014-10-01

James D. Vance v. Thomas H. Thiede
of the constructive trust. ¶2 We conclude the findings of fact as they relate to Thomas
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2839 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
of the appellant’s procedural issues impacts our analysis of the appellant’s substantive claims, we will address
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132733 - 2015-01-07

[PDF] State v. Jeffrey W. Holzemer
sentencing discretion. We disagree and affirm. Nos. 94-2015-CR 94-2016-CR -2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7995 - 2017-09-19

Daniel Khalar v. James Murphy
verdict on the claims, is "contrary to the post-verdict provisions of chapter 805 Stats." We conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10161 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 Veterans of Foreign Wars v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee
where the VFW post was located. ¶2 We conclude that because a raze order for the building at 2601
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5468 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
of initial confinement and extended supervision. We disagree and affirm the circuit court. BACKGROUND
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=273940 - 2020-07-30

Richard Bender v. Town of Kronenwetter
) the special assessment is unreasonable. We affirm the circuit court’s orders in all respects except
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4937 - 2011-10-30

Madison Teachers Inc. v. Madison Metropolitan School District
affirmance of the arbitrator’s decision. We agree. We conclude the arbitrator did not act outside the scope
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6172 - 2005-03-31