Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18991 - 19000 of 82412 for simple case.
Search results 18991 - 19000 of 82412 for simple case.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to see if the SPD would reappoint the former attorney to Sparks’s case after the suspension was lifted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=823763 - 2024-07-10
to see if the SPD would reappoint the former attorney to Sparks’s case after the suspension was lifted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=823763 - 2024-07-10
[PDF]
Sherry Mulligan v. Barbara J. Koehler
and Koehler appealed the September 28, 1994, judgment to this court in case number 94-2532. Ultimately
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10417 - 2017-09-20
and Koehler appealed the September 28, 1994, judgment to this court in case number 94-2532. Ultimately
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10417 - 2017-09-20
State v. Richard J. Wooster
980 does not constitute a new factor in this case. B. Sentencing Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8229 - 2005-03-31
980 does not constitute a new factor in this case. B. Sentencing Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8229 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
confidentiality, we use pseudonyms for the child and parent in this case. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.86(1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1020740 - 2025-10-14
confidentiality, we use pseudonyms for the child and parent in this case. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.86(1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1020740 - 2025-10-14
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1075753 - 2026-02-11
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1075753 - 2026-02-11
[PDF]
NOTICE
disagree and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. ¶2 The facts of the case are as follows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32694 - 2014-09-15
disagree and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. ¶2 The facts of the case are as follows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32694 - 2014-09-15
2007 WI APP 236
2007 WI App 236 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2006AP2388-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30520 - 2007-11-27
2007 WI App 236 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2006AP2388-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30520 - 2007-11-27
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. § 809.21(1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=647907 - 2023-04-25
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. § 809.21(1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=647907 - 2023-04-25
COURT OF APPEALS
suspensions was still pending and could not be used against him in the instant case. The court held a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32021 - 2008-03-11
suspensions was still pending and could not be used against him in the instant case. The court held a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32021 - 2008-03-11
COURT OF APPEALS
(collectively “Zimmerman”) appeal an order regarding an award of attorney fees in a “lemon law” case. Zimmerman
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76071 - 2012-02-20
(collectively “Zimmerman”) appeal an order regarding an award of attorney fees in a “lemon law” case. Zimmerman
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76071 - 2012-02-20