Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1751 - 1760 of 6482 for dr.
Search results 1751 - 1760 of 6482 for dr.
John McClellan v. Mary L. Santich
-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist who testified on behalf of Santich during the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7910 - 2005-03-31
-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist who testified on behalf of Santich during the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7910 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
John McClellan v. Mary L. Santich
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8227 - 2017-09-19
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8227 - 2017-09-19
John McClellan v. Mary L. Santich
-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist who testified on behalf of Santich during the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8138 - 2005-03-31
-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist who testified on behalf of Santich during the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8138 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
John McClellan v. Mary L. Santich
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8138 - 2017-09-19
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8138 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
John McClellan v. Mary L. Santich
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7910 - 2017-09-19
argues that the trial court erred by limiting his cross-examination of Dr. Marc Ackerman, a psychologist
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7910 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Gerald R. Fogle
of the incident, although she testified that Fogle choked her twice during the incident. An expert witness, Dr
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19889 - 2017-09-21
of the incident, although she testified that Fogle choked her twice during the incident. An expert witness, Dr
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19889 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Anita Novak v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
was initially treated by Dr. Gordon Grieshaber on May 3, 1995. He diagnosed a lumbar strain with secondary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2325 - 2017-09-19
was initially treated by Dr. Gordon Grieshaber on May 3, 1995. He diagnosed a lumbar strain with secondary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2325 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
George E. Thornton v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
testimony from Thornton’s medical expert, Dr. Carl Smoot, and Goodman’s experts, Drs. Richard Effros
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5228 - 2017-09-19
testimony from Thornton’s medical expert, Dr. Carl Smoot, and Goodman’s experts, Drs. Richard Effros
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5228 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Montrell D. McDade
around her neck and chest. Dr. Mary Mainland performed an autopsy on Asanti and reported observing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19966 - 2017-09-21
around her neck and chest. Dr. Mary Mainland performed an autopsy on Asanti and reported observing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19966 - 2017-09-21
State v. Gerald R. Fogle
during the incident. An expert witness, Dr. Kevin Fullin, testified that the injuries to Marlow’s throat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19889 - 2005-10-11
during the incident. An expert witness, Dr. Kevin Fullin, testified that the injuries to Marlow’s throat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19889 - 2005-10-11