Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 19301 - 19310 of 68693 for law.

COURT OF APPEALS
and this court.[1] Malm’s motion alluded to “new factor” law, alleges that the court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29419 - 2007-06-18

COURT OF APPEALS
charged is unknown in law, in other words, if it is a nonexistent crime. See State v. Webster, 196 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92401 - 2013-02-04

State v. Lance L. Egner
WI 114, 273 Wis. 2d 655, 684 N.W.2d 136 (No. 02-2229-CR). If charged offenses are identical in law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7152 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] CA Blank Order
. Prior to arriving, law enforcement officers were aware via Department of Transportation records
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=695280 - 2023-08-30

State v. Michael J. Parent
with a copy of the record. By previous order in this case, we rejected that argument. The more specific law
/ca/cert/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24865 - 2006-04-24

[PDF] Mary Fertel-Rust v. Department of Industry
the Wisconsin Open Housing Law. See § 101.22, STATS. The Department dismissed her complaint because she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8727 - 2017-09-19

Ronald E. Patten v. David H. Schwarz
by the administrative law judge, Patten submitted a copy of a document from the Division of Probation and Parole
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13106 - 2005-03-31

State v. Gerald C. McConnell
because the law permitted the fact finder to base a finding of guilt on both charges on the amount
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4381 - 2005-03-31

Rule Order
filed each year, a small number involve situations where the attorney's continuing practice of law
/sc/scord/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115410 - 2014-06-23

Woodland Hills Land Company v. County of Door
that a number of conditions are met. Construction of the ordinance is a question of law. See Hansman v. Oneida
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9542 - 2005-03-31