Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12871 - 12880 of 59341 for quit claim deed.

[PDF] State v. Craig Damaske
counsel constitutes both a sufficient reason for failing to raise these claims in earlier proceedings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15886 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
Horizon in small-claims court. Lamb’s nine-page complaint alleged three claims: an alleged violation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89385 - 2012-11-19

COURT OF APPEALS
their claims against American Transmission Company and ATC Management, Inc. (collectively, ATC). They contend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65391 - 2011-06-06

[PDF] State v. Conrad Hagenkord
the commitment order. He claims: (1) the State improperly used expert testimony as a conduit to adduce
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12256 - 2017-09-21

Kinship Inspection Service, Inc. v. Roy Newcomer
(the Kindschys), d/b/a Kinship Inspection Service, Inc., and dismissing their breach of contract claim against
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14273 - 2005-03-31

Karen Wipperfurth v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
and Bernadette Keul. The trial court granted plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment on their claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11968 - 2005-03-31

Tatiahanah Marie Miller v. Mauston School District
child, by her guardian ad litem, and of Cruea’s parents, Marilyn[2] and Earl Jackson, claimed negligence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12689 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Pablo Parrilla
, and argued that it was a threat to kill and contradicted the self-defense claim. The letter read: I’m
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25829 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
and the City,2 claiming that they are liable for negligence and for creating or maintaining a public nuisance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=472152 - 2022-01-13

John R. Ammerman v. Paddy A. Hauden
the bankruptcy court’s approval of the respondents’ purchase of the Normandy Lane property (tort claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6790 - 2005-03-31