Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1431 - 1440 of 2418 for ny.
Search results 1431 - 1440 of 2418 for ny.
Kim J. Barksdale v. Jon Litscher
the laws of that state,” and Wis. Stat. § 302.18(5) that “[a]ny person who is legally transferred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6326 - 2005-03-31
the laws of that state,” and Wis. Stat. § 302.18(5) that “[a]ny person who is legally transferred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6326 - 2005-03-31
State v. Kenneth Dwight Spaulding
“effective treatment” for his predatory propensity because “[a]ny sexual offender treatment requires
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16322 - 2005-03-31
“effective treatment” for his predatory propensity because “[a]ny sexual offender treatment requires
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16322 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Terry L. Benn v. James H. Benn
consequences to each party, the best interests of the child, [and] [a]ny other factors which the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10240 - 2017-09-20
consequences to each party, the best interests of the child, [and] [a]ny other factors which the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10240 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, holding the word “detectable” had “a distinct meaning,” and “[a]ny reasonable person [could] understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=236027 - 2019-02-26
, holding the word “detectable” had “a distinct meaning,” and “[a]ny reasonable person [could] understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=236027 - 2019-02-26
[PDF]
State v. Joel O. Peterson
review of the legislative history of the statute and concluded: [A]ny argued, though nonexistent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3496 - 2017-09-19
review of the legislative history of the statute and concluded: [A]ny argued, though nonexistent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3496 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Yasmin Horvath v. Craig E. Miller
discretion to grant such relief for “[a]ny other reasons justifying relief from the operation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3553 - 2017-09-19
discretion to grant such relief for “[a]ny other reasons justifying relief from the operation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3553 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN
regarding Kachinsky, Petit stated, “[A]ny exhibits I have marked and any exhibits I intend to present have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33785 - 2014-05-07
regarding Kachinsky, Petit stated, “[A]ny exhibits I have marked and any exhibits I intend to present have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33785 - 2014-05-07
State v. Kenneth Dwight Spaulding
“effective treatment” for his predatory propensity because “[a]ny sexual offender treatment requires
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16321 - 2005-03-31
“effective treatment” for his predatory propensity because “[a]ny sexual offender treatment requires
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16321 - 2005-03-31
State v. Paul E. Magnuson
in detention as “prisoners.” Wis. Stat. § 302.425(3). Furthermore, “[a]ny intentional failure of a prisoner
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17390 - 2005-03-31
in detention as “prisoners.” Wis. Stat. § 302.425(3). Furthermore, “[a]ny intentional failure of a prisoner
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17390 - 2005-03-31
William Speener v. Donald Gudmanson
in a correctional institution.”[3] Section 801.02(7)(a)1 defines “correctional institution” as: [A]ny state
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15204 - 2005-03-31
in a correctional institution.”[3] Section 801.02(7)(a)1 defines “correctional institution” as: [A]ny state
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15204 - 2005-03-31