Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22011 - 22020 of 83436 for case code.
Search results 22011 - 22020 of 83436 for case code.
[PDF]
State v. Jermaine P.
not prejudicial, this court affirms. I. BACKGROUND This case arises out of a shooting incident
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9339 - 2017-09-19
not prejudicial, this court affirms. I. BACKGROUND This case arises out of a shooting incident
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9339 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=241041 - 2019-05-21
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=241041 - 2019-05-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an order dismissing their case with prejudice as a sanction for failure to comply with court orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99971 - 2017-09-21
an order dismissing their case with prejudice as a sanction for failure to comply with court orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99971 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the briefs and record, we conclude that this case is appropriate for summary disposition and affirm. See
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=175610 - 2017-09-21
of the briefs and record, we conclude that this case is appropriate for summary disposition and affirm. See
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=175610 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
erroneously entered judgment against it after it presented its cases in a trial to the court. We reject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=95359 - 2013-04-16
erroneously entered judgment against it after it presented its cases in a trial to the court. We reject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=95359 - 2013-04-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. No. 2022AP71 2 this case is appropriate for summary disposition. We summarily affirm. See WIS. STAT
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=642096 - 2023-04-06
. No. 2022AP71 2 this case is appropriate for summary disposition. We summarily affirm. See WIS. STAT
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=642096 - 2023-04-06
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
agreement, Larry pled no contest to felony retail theft in this case and entered guilty or no contest
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=152829 - 2017-09-21
agreement, Larry pled no contest to felony retail theft in this case and entered guilty or no contest
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=152829 - 2017-09-21
State v. David W. Oakley
2001 WI 123 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 99-3328-CR Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17588 - 2005-03-31
2001 WI 123 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 99-3328-CR Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17588 - 2005-03-31
Andrew S. Zieve v. Ness
of the law firm's deduction of expenses from his share of the contingency fee in the Quint case. Zieve
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9361 - 2005-03-31
of the law firm's deduction of expenses from his share of the contingency fee in the Quint case. Zieve
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9361 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Village of Fremont v. Thomas L. Mischler
in No. 95-2292 -2- this zoning ordinance violation case. Because we agree with the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9547 - 2017-09-19
in No. 95-2292 -2- this zoning ordinance violation case. Because we agree with the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9547 - 2017-09-19