Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14041 - 14050 of 72987 for we.
Search results 14041 - 14050 of 72987 for we.
Arline A. Smith v. City of Oconto
as a matter of law, we affirm the summary judgment of dismissal. The record discloses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9815 - 2005-03-31
as a matter of law, we affirm the summary judgment of dismissal. The record discloses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9815 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
an evidentiary hearing on the petition. We affirm. I. ¶2 In June of 2000, the circuit court found Parrish
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82788 - 2012-05-21
an evidentiary hearing on the petition. We affirm. I. ¶2 In June of 2000, the circuit court found Parrish
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82788 - 2012-05-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Arnold offered did not constitute newly discovered evidence, we affirm. ¶2 In State v. Arnold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134640 - 2017-09-21
Arnold offered did not constitute newly discovered evidence, we affirm. ¶2 In State v. Arnold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134640 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
of coverage. Because the subject term is unambiguous, we affirm the judgment. Background ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86226 - 2012-08-20
of coverage. Because the subject term is unambiguous, we affirm the judgment. Background ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86226 - 2012-08-20
City of Kiel v. Michael T. Roehrig
detention of him was illegal under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). We reject Roehrig’s argument. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12235 - 2005-03-31
detention of him was illegal under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). We reject Roehrig’s argument. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12235 - 2005-03-31
State v. Stephen J. Weissenberger, Jr.
we conclude that Weissenberger received the proper amount of credit for his sentence, we affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13493 - 2005-03-31
we conclude that Weissenberger received the proper amount of credit for his sentence, we affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13493 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
modification motion. We conclude that Lambert is not entitled to sentence modification or resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31847 - 2014-09-15
modification motion. We conclude that Lambert is not entitled to sentence modification or resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31847 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
not consider all of his claims against the City and the officers. We conclude that the circuit court properly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56716 - 2010-11-16
not consider all of his claims against the City and the officers. We conclude that the circuit court properly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56716 - 2010-11-16
[PDF]
William James, Sr. v. Gary McCaughtry
proceeding. We reject his arguments and affirm. No. 01-3370 2 ¶2 While imprisoned at Waupun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4702 - 2017-09-19
proceeding. We reject his arguments and affirm. No. 01-3370 2 ¶2 While imprisoned at Waupun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4702 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Elizabeth Lornitzo v. Frank Lornitzo
Elspeth's maintenance. We No. 94-0523 -2- conclude that the stipulation which provides
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7782 - 2017-09-19
Elspeth's maintenance. We No. 94-0523 -2- conclude that the stipulation which provides
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7782 - 2017-09-19