Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20051 - 20060 of 84007 for case number.
Search results 20051 - 20060 of 84007 for case number.
State v. Karen A.O.
agreed to have twelve jurors plus the two alternate jurors decide the case. That means 12 of the 14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9930 - 2005-03-31
agreed to have twelve jurors plus the two alternate jurors decide the case. That means 12 of the 14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9930 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
James T. Carey, Jr. v. Ted Swiontek, Sr.
that their affidavits raise a genuine issue of material fact whether negotiations, as defined by the case law, occurred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11072 - 2017-09-19
that their affidavits raise a genuine issue of material fact whether negotiations, as defined by the case law, occurred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11072 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
downward minus the number of days of credit. For example in [the co-defendant’s] case, she’ll be required
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98998 - 2014-09-15
downward minus the number of days of credit. For example in [the co-defendant’s] case, she’ll be required
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98998 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and Clark engaged in a number of discussions from the time of the stop to the time that the deputy read
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99820 - 2017-09-21
and Clark engaged in a number of discussions from the time of the stop to the time that the deputy read
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99820 - 2017-09-21
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Albert J. Armonda
2004 WI 82 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 04-0984-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16828 - 2005-03-31
2004 WI 82 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 04-0984-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16828 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
if it can be shown that prejudice resulted from an arbitrary decision. This was not the case here. In fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30618 - 2007-10-16
if it can be shown that prejudice resulted from an arbitrary decision. This was not the case here. In fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30618 - 2007-10-16
[PDF]
NOTICE
an arbitrary decision. This was not the case here. In fact, many of the factors from the Wollman test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30618 - 2014-09-15
an arbitrary decision. This was not the case here. In fact, many of the factors from the Wollman test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30618 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1051051 - 2025-12-17
2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1051051 - 2025-12-17
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
.” No. 2023AP821 2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition, and we affirm. See
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=932661 - 2025-03-25
.” No. 2023AP821 2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition, and we affirm. See
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=932661 - 2025-03-25
[PDF]
McAdams, Inc. v. Transportation Insurance Co.
greater) limit of § 631.83(1)(a), STATS. McAdams also argues that the cases broadly interpreting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11710 - 2017-09-20
greater) limit of § 631.83(1)(a), STATS. McAdams also argues that the cases broadly interpreting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11710 - 2017-09-20