Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2061 - 2070 of 63933 for records/1000.

[PDF] State v. Brent R. Reed
also Black's Law Dictionary 1000 (6th ed. 1990) (defining "misleading" as "[d]elusive; calculated
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17932 - 2017-09-21

State v. Brent R. Reed
1444 (unabr. 1986); see also Black's Law Dictionary 1000 (6th ed. 1990) (defining "misleading" as "[d
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17932 - 2005-04-26

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
the failure of the [circuit] court to base its decision on the facts in the record.”). We uphold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=821660 - 2024-07-16

[PDF] Daniel P. Gaugert v. Howard E. Duve
property, after the filing of the complaint the plaintiff shall present for filing or recording
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17445 - 2017-09-21

Daniel P. Gaugert v. Howard E. Duve
, the property at issue in the present case. ¶4 The Gaugerts' option was recorded on March 9, 1995. Prior
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17445 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Frontsheet
expansion of the record created by the PSC and permitted discovery subpoenas of Michael Huebsch. We so
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=542121 - 2022-09-14

[PDF] David J. Dowiasch v. Tracy L. Dowiasch
paid for it, and that there was a question as to who owned it. Next, the court subtracted $1000
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15026 - 2017-09-21

David J. Dowiasch v. Tracy L. Dowiasch
, the court subtracted $1000 for some Deletron pulsation units, and $1,500 for a Pipeline milking system
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15026 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Mary L. O. v. Tommy R. B., Jr.
as to be irrational" and instead set child support payments at $1000 per month. Id. at 837. The court of appeals
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16868 - 2017-09-21

Mary L. O. v. Tommy R. B., Jr.
support payments at $1000 per month. Id. at 837. The court of appeals upheld the trial court's judgment
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16868 - 2005-03-31