Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1951 - 1960 of 16854 for "48.44" +50.

[PDF] Shona Sweeney v. General Casualty Company of Wisconsin
N.W.2d 826 (Ct. App.1993) (Kuhn I), aff’d on other grounds, 193 Wis.2d 50, 532 N.W.2d 124 (1995
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12740 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] WI APP 90
: Beginning April 1, 2008, husband shall pay to wife by wage assignment 50% of his base salary, and 50
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36377 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] U.S. Bank National Association v. City of Milwaukee
the remainder of § 74.37, which Nankin held “will remain fully operative.” Nankin, 2001 WI 92, ¶¶48–50, 245
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6279 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Peter Kienitz
. Kienitz was 50 years old. He was on intensive supervision, with rules designed to help him avoid
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17267 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] WI APP 64
. Paszek, 50 Wis. 2d 619, 630, 184 N.W.2d 836 (1971), and State v. Kerr, 181 Wis. 2d 372, 381, 511 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193805 - 2017-10-09

[PDF] 2017 OWI Guidelines District 6
Mitigated Aggravated Jail 5 Days 10 Days 10 Days 23 Days 17 Days 28 Days 22 Days 37 Days 28 Days 50 Days 38
/publications/fees/docs/d6owi2017.pdf - 2017-03-02

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
collateral consequence. See Marathon Cnty. v. D.K., 2020 WI 8, ¶25, 390 Wis. 2d 50, 937 N.W.2d 901
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=429055 - 2021-09-21

State v. Peter Kienitz
in 1988, Mr. Kienitz was 50 years old. He was on intensive supervision, with rules designed to help him
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17267 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] SCR CHAPTER 31
than 50 minutes. (5) "Inactive member" means an inactive member of the state bar under SCR 10.03
/sc/scrule/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=320592 - 2021-01-04

Shona Sweeney v. General Casualty Company of Wisconsin
on other grounds, 193 Wis.2d 50, 532 N.W.2d 124 (1995) (Kuhn II), and the later supreme court decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12740 - 2005-03-31