Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 13951 - 13960 of 83948 for simple case search/1000.

07AP2440 State v. Caprice S.I.doc
. The undisputed facts of this case establish that a dangerous weapon, a padlock with a shoestring attached
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32273 - 2008-04-01

[PDF] NOTICE
issue is interrogatory number sixteen, which asked the defendants to describe the cell search by two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27429 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
that she did not go armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon. The undisputed facts of this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32273 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 14, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
, which asked the defendants to describe the cell search by two defendants on a certain date when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27429 - 2006-12-13

English Manor Bed and Breakfast v. City of Sheboygan
2006 WI App 91 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2005AP1358 Complete
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24839 - 2006-05-30

[PDF] Frontsheet
2023 WI 19 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2019AP1728 & 2019AP2063
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=634083 - 2023-04-25

[PDF] English Manor Bed and Breakfast v. City of Sheboygan
2006 WI APP 91 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2005AP1358
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24839 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] David Ott v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
.2d 222 (1978). This court’s role is to search the record to locate credible evidence that supports
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7169 - 2017-09-20

State v. James R. Walz
or “show of authority.” Id. at 572-73. The trooper’s actions in this case were arguably less intrusive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6715 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
retrial after a successful appeal applies in this case. We reject Faulkner’s double jeopardy argument
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=144469 - 2017-09-21