Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 19521 - 19530 of 58547 for speedy trial.

[PDF] Melvin R. Smith, Jr. v. Linda A. Smith
the trial court’s No. 03-2335 2 determination.1 Because the record demonstrates the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6826 - 2017-09-20

State v. Scot A. Czarnecki
“statutory bias,” we reverse the judgments and the order of the trial court and remand for a new trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14408 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Dane County Department of Human Services v. Thomas M.
constitutional rights; (2) the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion to extend the Dane County
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15617 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Janice E. Rutan v. Sandra Kay Miller
the answer to not be filed on time. Miller further contends that the trial court erred by restricting her
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12128 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Ronald Binon v. Great Northern Insurance Company
. At summary judgment, the trial court ruled in the affirmative as to both questions. In a separate ruling
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12193 - 2017-09-21

Shanee Y. v. Ronnie J.
claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion in denying his motion to open
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6456 - 2005-03-31

Shanee Y. v. Ronnie J.
claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion in denying his motion to open
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6455 - 2005-03-31

State v. Theodore L. Briggs
grounds: the trial court erred as a matter of law by not requiring the State to prove that the value
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12087 - 2005-03-31

State v. Gregg A. Pfaff
. At the refusal hearing, the trial court sua sponte, and over objection, incorporated the transcript from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5407 - 2005-03-31

Betty L. Runchey-Wolff v. William A. Wolff
the unequal property division in William’s favor. Because the trial court did not articulate its reasoning
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15268 - 2005-03-31