Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1291 - 1300 of 63731 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 1291 - 1300 of 63731 for Motion for joint custody.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
enticement. The plea agreement called for a joint sentencing recommendation of four years’ probation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195918 - 2017-09-21
enticement. The plea agreement called for a joint sentencing recommendation of four years’ probation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195918 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
confinement and fifteen years’ extended supervision. Hawkins, pro se, filed a postconviction motion seeking
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=166055 - 2017-09-21
confinement and fifteen years’ extended supervision. Hawkins, pro se, filed a postconviction motion seeking
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=166055 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
that granted Green Tree Servicing, LLC’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Gilmore’s claims. Gilmore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103484 - 2013-10-28
that granted Green Tree Servicing, LLC’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Gilmore’s claims. Gilmore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103484 - 2013-10-28
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. § 940.225(2)(a). The terms of the negotiated plea agreement included a joint sentencing recommendation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=541748 - 2022-07-08
. § 940.225(2)(a). The terms of the negotiated plea agreement included a joint sentencing recommendation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=541748 - 2022-07-08
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Green Tree Servicing, LLC’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Gilmore’s claims. Gilmore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103484 - 2017-09-21
Green Tree Servicing, LLC’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Gilmore’s claims. Gilmore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103484 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
, which was incorporated into the judgment, they had joint legal custody. Primary placement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31689 - 2014-09-15
, which was incorporated into the judgment, they had joint legal custody. Primary placement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31689 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
hearing on August 23 and September 2, 2004.[2] Joint custody and primary placement was awarded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33445 - 2008-07-21
hearing on August 23 and September 2, 2004.[2] Joint custody and primary placement was awarded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33445 - 2008-07-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. The circuit court followed the parties’ joint sentencing recommendation, withheld sentence, and placed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=278387 - 2020-08-18
. The circuit court followed the parties’ joint sentencing recommendation, withheld sentence, and placed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=278387 - 2020-08-18
Sharon M. Blomdahl v. Corey C. Blomdahl
. ¶11 The result of the divorce hearing was that the parties agreed to joint legal custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6507 - 2005-03-31
. ¶11 The result of the divorce hearing was that the parties agreed to joint legal custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6507 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Sharon M. Blomdahl v. Corey C. Blomdahl
of the divorce hearing was that the parties agreed to joint legal custody, substantially equal placement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6507 - 2017-09-19
of the divorce hearing was that the parties agreed to joint legal custody, substantially equal placement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6507 - 2017-09-19