Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17581 - 17590 of 65135 for or b.
Search results 17581 - 17590 of 65135 for or b.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Milwaukee County Appeals Processing Division Electronic Notice Faye B. Hipsman Electronic Notice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1059202 - 2026-01-13
Milwaukee County Appeals Processing Division Electronic Notice Faye B. Hipsman Electronic Notice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1059202 - 2026-01-13
State v. Delynn A. Streit
will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This opinion is decided by one judge pursuant to Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2674 - 2005-03-31
will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This opinion is decided by one judge pursuant to Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2674 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, J. M. (A MINOR) AND B. M. (A MINOR), PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=155574 - 2017-09-21
, J. M. (A MINOR) AND B. M. (A MINOR), PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=155574 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Travis Tucker v. State of Wisconsin Division of Hearings
of the circuit court for Racine County: ALLAN B. TORHORST, Judge. Affirmed. Before Nettesheim, Anderson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15390 - 2017-09-21
of the circuit court for Racine County: ALLAN B. TORHORST, Judge. Affirmed. Before Nettesheim, Anderson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15390 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Jerry A. Foskett
is a combination of the following factors: (a) it was “bar time;” (b) Foskett was speeding; (c) his eyes were
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2269 - 2017-09-19
is a combination of the following factors: (a) it was “bar time;” (b) Foskett was speeding; (c) his eyes were
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2269 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
)(b). ¶7 The County’s burden at the refusal hearing was to “present evidence sufficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34330 - 2008-10-15
)(b). ¶7 The County’s burden at the refusal hearing was to “present evidence sufficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34330 - 2008-10-15
State v. Rosalinda S.
evidence to support the jury’s finding. B. Discretionary Reversal. ¶8 Mr. K. next
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6322 - 2005-03-31
evidence to support the jury’s finding. B. Discretionary Reversal. ¶8 Mr. K. next
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6322 - 2005-03-31
David J. Rustad v. Michael Sullivan
. § 302.335(2)(b) (1997-98).[1] State ex rel. Jones v. Division of Hearings & Appeals, 195 Wis. 2d 669, 671
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15357 - 2005-03-31
. § 302.335(2)(b) (1997-98).[1] State ex rel. Jones v. Division of Hearings & Appeals, 195 Wis. 2d 669, 671
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15357 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Mark A. Sturm
this). In addition, Sturm relies on the language of WIS. STAT. § 346.34(1)(b), which requires use of a turn signal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6696 - 2017-09-20
this). In addition, Sturm relies on the language of WIS. STAT. § 346.34(1)(b), which requires use of a turn signal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6696 - 2017-09-20
State v. James R. Schiller
, and the record would not support such a finding. b. Improper prosecutorial motive or purpose ¶8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2574 - 2005-03-31
, and the record would not support such a finding. b. Improper prosecutorial motive or purpose ¶8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2574 - 2005-03-31