Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14101 - 14110 of 59277 for SMALL CLAIMS.
Search results 14101 - 14110 of 59277 for SMALL CLAIMS.
James Reese v. City of Pewaukee
, 2000, the Reeses filed a notice of claim with the City of Pewaukee, challenging the reassessment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3780 - 2005-03-31
, 2000, the Reeses filed a notice of claim with the City of Pewaukee, challenging the reassessment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3780 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Brown County Department of Human Services v. Terrance M.
is entitled to judicial substitution and the new judge should determine whether claim or issue preclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7643 - 2017-09-19
is entitled to judicial substitution and the new judge should determine whether claim or issue preclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7643 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
denying postconviction relief.[1] We reject his claims and affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=127185 - 2014-11-11
denying postconviction relief.[1] We reject his claims and affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=127185 - 2014-11-11
[PDF]
NOTICE
Family Trust and awarding Mensch, L.L.C., damages on its claim that the Rubenzers abused process
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27146 - 2014-09-15
Family Trust and awarding Mensch, L.L.C., damages on its claim that the Rubenzers abused process
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27146 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Brown County Department of Human Services v. Terrance M.
is entitled to judicial substitution and the new judge should determine whether claim or issue preclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7644 - 2017-09-19
is entitled to judicial substitution and the new judge should determine whether claim or issue preclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7644 - 2017-09-19
Armin Nankin v. Village of Shorewood
request that Wis. Stat. § 74.37(6) (1997-98)[1] be declared unconstitutional. Nankin claims the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15418 - 2005-03-31
request that Wis. Stat. § 74.37(6) (1997-98)[1] be declared unconstitutional. Nankin claims the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15418 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
with an expectancy based on a diminished inheritance. Consequently, the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1028936 - 2025-10-28
with an expectancy based on a diminished inheritance. Consequently, the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1028936 - 2025-10-28
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
court determined Cheel’s breach of contract claim against Society was time barred and rejected
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=890648 - 2024-12-18
court determined Cheel’s breach of contract claim against Society was time barred and rejected
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=890648 - 2024-12-18
[PDF]
NOTICE
period for reconfinement, and that our rejection of these claims compels our rejection of an interest
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=52530 - 2014-09-15
period for reconfinement, and that our rejection of these claims compels our rejection of an interest
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=52530 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
. Because Morris’s claims are procedurally barred, we affirm. Background ¶2 Morris was charged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=73344 - 2011-11-07
. Because Morris’s claims are procedurally barred, we affirm. Background ¶2 Morris was charged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=73344 - 2011-11-07