Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1861 - 1870 of 17421 for Cost.
Search results 1861 - 1870 of 17421 for Cost.
Oneida County v. Sara J.W.
that the only feasible placement for Sara J. W. was Outagamie County Health Center, because the cost of a CBRF
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10757 - 2005-03-31
that the only feasible placement for Sara J. W. was Outagamie County Health Center, because the cost of a CBRF
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10757 - 2005-03-31
Omowale Nubian Black v. Eleanor Swoboda
for failure to prosecute, and whether the trial court erred in denying Black's request for costs, fees
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9726 - 2005-03-31
for failure to prosecute, and whether the trial court erred in denying Black's request for costs, fees
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9726 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
se, 1 appeals a determination, after remand, of the costs, fees, and reasonable attorney fees
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=224007 - 2018-10-30
se, 1 appeals a determination, after remand, of the costs, fees, and reasonable attorney fees
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=224007 - 2018-10-30
Shawn Madden v. Mike Hanson
, and entered judgment in favor of the Maddens for the replacement cost of the pool plus associated costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14405 - 2005-03-31
, and entered judgment in favor of the Maddens for the replacement cost of the pool plus associated costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14405 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Michael A. Stauffacher v. Douglas E. Stoneman
, Stoneman argues that the trial court erred in awarding $3,828.35 in costs and fees because the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10712 - 2017-09-20
, Stoneman argues that the trial court erred in awarding $3,828.35 in costs and fees because the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10712 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
Love, who was eligible for a State Public Defender (“SPD”) attorney, may challenge the fees and costs
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1079617 - 2026-02-18
Love, who was eligible for a State Public Defender (“SPD”) attorney, may challenge the fees and costs
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1079617 - 2026-02-18
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
Love, who was eligible for a State Public Defender (“SPD”) attorney, may challenge the fees and costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1079617 - 2026-02-18
Love, who was eligible for a State Public Defender (“SPD”) attorney, may challenge the fees and costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1079617 - 2026-02-18
[PDF]
Frontsheet
to pay the No. 2009AP941-D 2 full costs of this proceeding, which are $1,512.41
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=149162 - 2017-09-21
to pay the No. 2009AP941-D 2 full costs of this proceeding, which are $1,512.41
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=149162 - 2017-09-21
Frontsheet
) would be appropriate. They stipulated that Attorney Hughes should be responsible for the cost
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34283 - 2008-10-13
) would be appropriate. They stipulated that Attorney Hughes should be responsible for the cost
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34283 - 2008-10-13
[PDF]
03-06 Supplemental Order - Repeal of Wis. Stats. ss. 802.05 and 814.025, and adoption of Rule 11 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in lieu thereof as amended Wis. Stat. s. 802.05 (Effective 07-01-05)
and actual costs. Payment may be assessed against either the employee or the employee's attorney
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18689 - 2017-09-21
and actual costs. Payment may be assessed against either the employee or the employee's attorney
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18689 - 2017-09-21