Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 211 - 220 of 17366 for Cost.
Search results 211 - 220 of 17366 for Cost.
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Clay F. Teasdale
Teasdale be required to pay restitution to the client, as well as the costs of this disciplinary
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16823 - 2017-09-21
Teasdale be required to pay restitution to the client, as well as the costs of this disciplinary
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16823 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Supreme Court rule petition 12-10 - supporting memo
In the Matter of the Petition For Amendment to Supreme Court Rule 22.24 Relating to Costs Assessments
/supreme/docs/1210petitionmemo.pdf - 2012-09-12
In the Matter of the Petition For Amendment to Supreme Court Rule 22.24 Relating to Costs Assessments
/supreme/docs/1210petitionmemo.pdf - 2012-09-12
Robert Stanek v. John C. Mickelson
statement of costs in Mickelson's judgment. The matter is remanded for the limited purpose of recalculating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8794 - 2005-03-31
statement of costs in Mickelson's judgment. The matter is remanded for the limited purpose of recalculating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8794 - 2005-03-31
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Kevin M. Kelsay
objecting to the OLR’s statement of costs associated with the reinstatement proceeding, which total
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16849 - 2005-03-31
objecting to the OLR’s statement of costs associated with the reinstatement proceeding, which total
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16849 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Kevin M. Kelsay
on the merits, however Attorney Kelsay has filed a letter objecting to the OLR’s statement of costs
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16849 - 2017-09-21
on the merits, however Attorney Kelsay has filed a letter objecting to the OLR’s statement of costs
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16849 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
to costs and reasonable attorney fees associated with defending this appeal; therefore, we remand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60488 - 2011-02-28
to costs and reasonable attorney fees associated with defending this appeal; therefore, we remand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60488 - 2011-02-28
[PDF]
Mardie Hartenstein v. Pekin Insurance Company
and good-faith duties when it did not pay promptly replacement costs after a fire damaged her house. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25506 - 2017-09-21
and good-faith duties when it did not pay promptly replacement costs after a fire damaged her house. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25506 - 2017-09-21
Mardie Hartenstein v. Pekin Insurance Company
its contractual and good-faith duties when it did not pay promptly replacement costs after a fire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25506 - 2006-06-12
its contractual and good-faith duties when it did not pay promptly replacement costs after a fire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25506 - 2006-06-12
[PDF]
WI App 48
granted AUI’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. AUI then filed a bill of costs and notice of taxation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980104 - 2025-09-18
granted AUI’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. AUI then filed a bill of costs and notice of taxation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980104 - 2025-09-18
State v. Michael T. Schmaling
to Racine County for the cost of fighting a fire and cleaning up after the fire and that he pay the costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8281 - 2005-03-31
to Racine County for the cost of fighting a fire and cleaning up after the fire and that he pay the costs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8281 - 2005-03-31