Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18051 - 18060 of 83447 for civil case no. "90-77".
Search results 18051 - 18060 of 83447 for civil case no. "90-77".
State v. Juergen Huebner
in misdemeanor cases shall consist of 6 persons.”), violated Article I, § 7 of the Wisconsin Constitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14429 - 2006-10-30
in misdemeanor cases shall consist of 6 persons.”), violated Article I, § 7 of the Wisconsin Constitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14429 - 2006-10-30
[PDF]
State v. Juergen Huebner
(“A jury in misdemeanor cases shall consist of 6 persons.”), violated Article I, § 7 of the Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14429 - 2017-09-21
(“A jury in misdemeanor cases shall consist of 6 persons.”), violated Article I, § 7 of the Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14429 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, Waukesha county case nos. 1997CF19 and 1999CF251. The circuit court sentenced Dillon to a total of ten
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104911 - 2017-09-21
, Waukesha county case nos. 1997CF19 and 1999CF251. The circuit court sentenced Dillon to a total of ten
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104911 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
resentencing. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206650 - 2018-01-10
resentencing. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206650 - 2018-01-10
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=848671 - 2024-09-11
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=848671 - 2024-09-11
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 27, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
and affirming the dismissal and remand of this case to the municipal court. Because we determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27591 - 2006-12-26
and affirming the dismissal and remand of this case to the municipal court. Because we determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27591 - 2006-12-26
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=848671 - 2024-09-11
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=848671 - 2024-09-11
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
identical orders in each case in response. Nos. 2015AP1848 2015AP1849 2 at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=205014 - 2017-12-11
identical orders in each case in response. Nos. 2015AP1848 2015AP1849 2 at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=205014 - 2017-12-11
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
address in this case—a circuit court’s competency and the interpretation of a statute—are issues of law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206044 - 2017-12-27
address in this case—a circuit court’s competency and the interpretation of a statute—are issues of law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206044 - 2017-12-27
COURT OF APPEALS
of the case doctrine by concluding Wieczorek was unlawfully seized because we determined the seizure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101687 - 2013-09-09
of the case doctrine by concluding Wieczorek was unlawfully seized because we determined the seizure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101687 - 2013-09-09