Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15871 - 15880 of 83395 for simple case search.
Search results 15871 - 15880 of 83395 for simple case search.
Teddy A. Schlueter v. Kae Hubred
affirm. FACTS ¶2 The parties dispute material facts of this case. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6409 - 2005-03-31
affirm. FACTS ¶2 The parties dispute material facts of this case. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6409 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
the case. When questioned by the trial court, trial counsel confirmed that he had a conversation about
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=125500 - 2014-11-03
the case. When questioned by the trial court, trial counsel confirmed that he had a conversation about
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=125500 - 2014-11-03
Winnebago County v. Mark S. Lisiecki
Like the Spaeth case, this case involves the penalty provisions of Wis. Stat. § 343.44(2) because OAS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4801 - 2005-03-31
Like the Spaeth case, this case involves the penalty provisions of Wis. Stat. § 343.44(2) because OAS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4801 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
certiorari review in the circuit court. The circuit court remanded the case for further deliberations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=241818 - 2019-06-12
certiorari review in the circuit court. The circuit court remanded the case for further deliberations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=241818 - 2019-06-12
[PDF]
WI APP 59
2013 WI APP 59 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2012AP827-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94722 - 2014-09-15
2013 WI APP 59 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2012AP827-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94722 - 2014-09-15
Thomas M. Teubel v. Prime Development, Inc.
2002 WI App 26 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 01-1098 Complete
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3879 - 2005-03-31
2002 WI App 26 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 01-1098 Complete
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3879 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
defense, and (2) without the proffered evidence, he had “no reasonable means of defending his case.” See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33325 - 2009-07-08
defense, and (2) without the proffered evidence, he had “no reasonable means of defending his case.” See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33325 - 2009-07-08
[PDF]
NOTICE
to suppress evidence. There are two issues in this case: (1) whether the stop of Lamb’s vehicle constituted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=43703 - 2014-09-15
to suppress evidence. There are two issues in this case: (1) whether the stop of Lamb’s vehicle constituted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=43703 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
apply that intent to the case at hand and do not search for meaning outside the text of the statute. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109569 - 2014-03-26
apply that intent to the case at hand and do not search for meaning outside the text of the statute. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109569 - 2014-03-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. Affirmed. Before Lundsten, Sherman and Kloppenburg, JJ. ¶1 LUNDSTEN, J. This case arises from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109569 - 2017-09-21
. Affirmed. Before Lundsten, Sherman and Kloppenburg, JJ. ¶1 LUNDSTEN, J. This case arises from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109569 - 2017-09-21