Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1511 - 1520 of 17421 for Cost.
Search results 1511 - 1520 of 17421 for Cost.
Mary Judith Johnson v. Robert R. Johnson
. Generally, we have held that property appraised for property division purposes should not include the cost
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14610 - 2005-03-31
. Generally, we have held that property appraised for property division purposes should not include the cost
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14610 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
by failing to consider her significantly higher health care costs. We agree. We therefore reverse
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=38609 - 2014-09-15
by failing to consider her significantly higher health care costs. We agree. We therefore reverse
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=38609 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Frontsheet
recommended that Attorney Gorokhovsky pay the costs of this proceeding. As of April 29, 2013, the Office
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105746 - 2017-09-21
recommended that Attorney Gorokhovsky pay the costs of this proceeding. As of April 29, 2013, the Office
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105746 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Frontsheet
the full costs of this proceeding, which are $12,022.38 as of December 2, 2014. No. 2012AP818-D
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135152 - 2017-09-21
the full costs of this proceeding, which are $12,022.38 as of December 2, 2014. No. 2012AP818-D
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135152 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Mary Judith Johnson v. Robert R. Johnson
for property division purposes should not include the cost of selling the appraised property unless a sale
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14610 - 2017-09-21
for property division purposes should not include the cost of selling the appraised property unless a sale
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14610 - 2017-09-21
Frontsheet
costs of this proceeding, which are $12,022.38 as of December 2, 2014. Attorney Hammis asserts
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135152 - 2015-02-16
costs of this proceeding, which are $12,022.38 as of December 2, 2014. Attorney Hammis asserts
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135152 - 2015-02-16
COURT OF APPEALS
costs. We agree. We therefore reverse and remand the matter for further proceedings consistent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=38609 - 2005-03-31
costs. We agree. We therefore reverse and remand the matter for further proceedings consistent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=38609 - 2005-03-31
Rules Hearing
to Supreme Court Rule 22.24 relating to Cost Assessments in the Lawyer Regulation System. FILED AUG 3
/sc/scord/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52996 - 2010-08-02
to Supreme Court Rule 22.24 relating to Cost Assessments in the Lawyer Regulation System. FILED AUG 3
/sc/scord/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52996 - 2010-08-02
Thomas W. Reimann v. Dale Poliak
Correctional Institution where Poliak is the manager of the Health Services Unit. Reimann claims costs, fees
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8362 - 2005-03-31
Correctional Institution where Poliak is the manager of the Health Services Unit. Reimann claims costs, fees
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8362 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
without determining his ability to pay. Correlatively, he objected to the $1200 added as costs because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=108576 - 2014-03-04
without determining his ability to pay. Correlatively, he objected to the $1200 added as costs because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=108576 - 2014-03-04