Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20301 - 20310 of 65143 for or b.
Search results 20301 - 20310 of 65143 for or b.
COURT OF APPEALS
809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This is an expedited appeal under Wis. Stat. Rule 809.17, decided by one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45733 - 2010-01-13
809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This is an expedited appeal under Wis. Stat. Rule 809.17, decided by one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45733 - 2010-01-13
COURT OF APPEALS
. This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This appeal is decided by one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33672 - 2008-08-06
. This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4. [1] This appeal is decided by one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33672 - 2008-08-06
Sherry Mulligan v. Barbara J. Koehler
(1)(b)5, Stats. The term “court” is defined in Rule 809.01(4), Stats.: “`Court' means the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10417 - 2005-03-31
(1)(b)5, Stats. The term “court” is defined in Rule 809.01(4), Stats.: “`Court' means the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10417 - 2005-03-31
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michelle L. Danielson
)(a) and (b),[3] pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). Additionally, by failing to file a SCR 22.26(1)(e) post
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24947 - 2006-04-27
)(a) and (b),[3] pursuant to SCR 20:8.4(f). Additionally, by failing to file a SCR 22.26(1)(e) post
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24947 - 2006-04-27
COURT OF APPEALS
was prejudicial. State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 633, 369 N.W.2d 711 (1985). “[B]oth the performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142619 - 2015-06-02
was prejudicial. State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 633, 369 N.W.2d 711 (1985). “[B]oth the performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142619 - 2015-06-02
COURT OF APPEALS
as that resulting in the new conviction.” Sec. 973.155(1)(b) (emphasis added). The statute is devoid of any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94773 - 2013-04-02
as that resulting in the new conviction.” Sec. 973.155(1)(b) (emphasis added). The statute is devoid of any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94773 - 2013-04-02
Kevin Radman v. Darlene Gustafson
as a matter of discretion.” 1 Dan B. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 2.4(1), at 90 (2nd ed. 1999). “Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4225 - 2005-03-31
as a matter of discretion.” 1 Dan B. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 2.4(1), at 90 (2nd ed. 1999). “Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4225 - 2005-03-31
State v. Daniel P. Moen
. It was reasonable for the jury to infer from these facts that he was operating the vehicle. B. Defense Motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
. It was reasonable for the jury to infer from these facts that he was operating the vehicle. B. Defense Motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
setting, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 943.20(1)(b). The circuit court ordered Sampson to pay restitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59541 - 2011-01-31
setting, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 943.20(1)(b). The circuit court ordered Sampson to pay restitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59541 - 2011-01-31
COURT OF APPEALS
that Wis. Stat. § 111.335(1)(b) and (c)1. allowed an employer to refuse to hire an individual
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50274 - 2010-05-24
that Wis. Stat. § 111.335(1)(b) and (c)1. allowed an employer to refuse to hire an individual
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50274 - 2010-05-24