Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 13011 - 13020 of 18714 for quote.

[PDF] Calvary Covenant Church v. Marie Nyquist
Estate of Dejmal, 95 Wis. 2d 141, 153, 289 N.W.2d 813 (1980) (quoting In re Estate of White, 273 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3911 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] John P. Pappas v. Angeline Pappas Petros
and quoted sources omitted). ¶25 The circuit court found that the coal bunker underneath the alley
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4861 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS
’ is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” Id., ¶14 (quoting United States v. Bagley
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34965 - 2008-12-22

State v. William D. Olson
at 458, 195 N.W.2d at 476 (quoting Griffin v. State, 43 Wis.2d 385, 389, 168 N.W.2d 571, 573 (1969
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8358 - 2005-03-31

State v. William D. Olson
at 458, 195 N.W.2d at 476 (quoting Griffin v. State, 43 Wis.2d 385, 389, 168 N.W.2d 571, 573 (1969
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8359 - 2005-03-31

WI App 37 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2011AP838 Complete Title of ...
to the client, “a malpractice claim is hypothetical and damages are speculative.” Id. at 1044 (quoting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=78554 - 2012-03-27

[PDF] CA Blank Order
, 527 N.W.2d 343 (Ct. App. 1994) (Schudson, J., concurring/dissenting) (quoting Nichols v. Butler, 953
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=544587 - 2022-07-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
.’” Malzewski, 296 Wis. 2d 98, ¶18 (quoting Lambert, 218 Wis. 2d at 731). We explained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1017415 - 2025-10-01

CA Blank Order
. Zimmerman, 2003 WI App 196, ¶24, 266 Wis. 2d 1003, 669 N.W.2d 762 (quoting State v. Poellinger, 153 Wis. 2d
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=120249 - 2014-08-21

COURT OF APPEALS
(quoted sources and quotation marks omitted). ¶16 The trial court did not explain why it overruled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94655 - 2013-04-01