Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22311 - 22320 of 49879 for our.
Search results 22311 - 22320 of 49879 for our.
State v. Victory Fireworks, Inc.
). If the statute's meaning is plain on its face, our inquiry ends, and we will apply it to the facts of the case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15060 - 2005-03-31
). If the statute's meaning is plain on its face, our inquiry ends, and we will apply it to the facts of the case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15060 - 2005-03-31
Aaron T. Rouse v. Theda Clark Medical Center, Inc.
This case presents our supreme court with the opportunity to provide definitive guidance on the status
/ca/cert/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26113 - 2006-08-08
This case presents our supreme court with the opportunity to provide definitive guidance on the status
/ca/cert/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26113 - 2006-08-08
Mike Gruenberger v. Timothy Ziolkowski
is a factual question for the trial court. Our standard of review in this situation is fairly limited, and we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12004 - 2005-04-22
is a factual question for the trial court. Our standard of review in this situation is fairly limited, and we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12004 - 2005-04-22
2010 WI APP 57
a reconfinement hearing is a resentencing. In Brown, our supreme court held that a circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48024 - 2011-11-01
a reconfinement hearing is a resentencing. In Brown, our supreme court held that a circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48024 - 2011-11-01
CA Blank Order
modification. Counsel had concluded there was not but, upon our original review of the record, we noted
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97263 - 2013-09-18
modification. Counsel had concluded there was not but, upon our original review of the record, we noted
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97263 - 2013-09-18
State v. Keith A. Glass
and [ ] will not suppress the array. ¶10 Our independent examination of the array indicates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4323 - 2005-03-31
and [ ] will not suppress the array. ¶10 Our independent examination of the array indicates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4323 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
discretion in sentencing him. In reviewing a circuit court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59510 - 2011-01-31
discretion in sentencing him. In reviewing a circuit court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59510 - 2011-01-31
Bar Code Resources v. Ameritech Information Systems, Inc.
.”). The application of a statute to undisputed facts presents a question of law, and our review of the trial court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13991 - 2005-03-31
.”). The application of a statute to undisputed facts presents a question of law, and our review of the trial court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13991 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
Wis. Stat. § 974.06 motion. We save this procedural issue for another day and instead focus our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89199 - 2012-11-13
Wis. Stat. § 974.06 motion. We save this procedural issue for another day and instead focus our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89199 - 2012-11-13
COURT OF APPEALS
was unavailable for the hearing. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶7 Our certiorari review is limited to the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30885 - 2007-11-14
was unavailable for the hearing. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶7 Our certiorari review is limited to the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30885 - 2007-11-14