Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18231 - 18240 of 28855 for f.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
in the outcome of” Young’s case, § 757.19(2)(f), the judge’s former client was not a “party” represented
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=256662 - 2020-03-18

[PDF] State v. Floyd Hopkins
and the National Government, and not upon that of the States.”); Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75, 84–86 (2d Cir. 2005
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20004 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Eric T. Scott
This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(f) (2003-04). All references
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17895 - 2017-09-21

Janice Johnson Kuhn v. Charles V. James
. at 31, 218 N.W.2d at 358 (quoting Giacalone v. Lucas, 445 F.2d 1238, 1240 (6th Cir. 1971)). The factors
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10921 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
] Woldmoe’s reliance on Arrowood v. Clusen, 732 F.2d 1364 (7th Cir. 1984), is misplaced. The facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142665 - 2015-06-01

Sheboygan County Department of Health & Human Services v. Julie A.B.
of the separation of the parent from the child. (f) Whether the child will be able to enter into a more stable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4106 - 2005-03-31

2010 WI APP 161
. [3] Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.047(1f) (2001-02), “[i]f a court imposes a sentence or places
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56896 - 2011-08-21

COURT OF APPEALS
County: edward f. vlack, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and cause remanded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32295 - 2008-03-31

State v. Bentura Martinez
impermissible suggestiveness. As observed in U.S. v. Lewis, 547 F.2d 1030, 1035 (8th Cir. 1976), cert. denied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9312 - 2005-03-31

State v. Steven W. Gauerke
, it did not affect Gauerke’s substantial rights. See Herman v. Butterworth, 929 F.2d 623, 628 (11th Cir
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12023 - 2005-03-31