Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2281 - 2290 of 17367 for Cost.
Search results 2281 - 2290 of 17367 for Cost.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
fees and costs under WIS. STAT. § 100.20 and WIS. ADMIN. CODE § ATCP 134.06(4)(b) in the amount
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142512 - 2017-09-21
fees and costs under WIS. STAT. § 100.20 and WIS. ADMIN. CODE § ATCP 134.06(4)(b) in the amount
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142512 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
). Accordingly, we remand for a determination of costs. Background ¶2 On August 15, 2007, Vang and WRC
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48807 - 2010-04-07
). Accordingly, we remand for a determination of costs. Background ¶2 On August 15, 2007, Vang and WRC
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48807 - 2010-04-07
COURT OF APPEALS
Cindy Anderson’s motion for costs, court fees, and attorney fees incurred for responding to a frivolous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107651 - 2014-02-03
Cindy Anderson’s motion for costs, court fees, and attorney fees incurred for responding to a frivolous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107651 - 2014-02-03
[PDF]
Guide to Wisconsin Appellate Procedure
much does it cost to appeal? A. The filing fee to open a case in the Court of Appeals is $195.2
/publications/guides/docs/proseappealsguide.pdf - 2025-07-01
much does it cost to appeal? A. The filing fee to open a case in the Court of Appeals is $195.2
/publications/guides/docs/proseappealsguide.pdf - 2025-07-01
Robert Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc.
have been awarded costs. ¶4 We affirm the judgment as it relates to the cross-appeal. We hold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25578 - 2006-06-27
have been awarded costs. ¶4 We affirm the judgment as it relates to the cross-appeal. We hold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25578 - 2006-06-27
[PDF]
Robert Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc.
party” and should have been awarded costs. ¶4 We affirm the judgment as it relates to the cross
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25578 - 2017-09-21
party” and should have been awarded costs. ¶4 We affirm the judgment as it relates to the cross
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25578 - 2017-09-21
State v. John W. Campbell
that Campbell had to pay $17,585.35 in attorney fees and costs. ¶24 Campbell filed a postconviction motion
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25866 - 2006-07-11
that Campbell had to pay $17,585.35 in attorney fees and costs. ¶24 Campbell filed a postconviction motion
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25866 - 2006-07-11
[PDF]
State v. John W. Campbell
$17,585.35 in attorney fees and costs. ¶24 Campbell filed a postconviction motion. He requested a new
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25866 - 2017-09-21
$17,585.35 in attorney fees and costs. ¶24 Campbell filed a postconviction motion. He requested a new
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25866 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Kerry L. Putnam v. Time Warner Cable of Southeastern Wisconsin
Warner’s actual costs; and (2) obtain declaratory and injunctive relief preventing Time Warner from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15848 - 2017-09-21
Warner’s actual costs; and (2) obtain declaratory and injunctive relief preventing Time Warner from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15848 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Frontsheet
of reinstatement. ¶5 Because the OLR has requested that we not impose the costs of this proceeding on Attorney
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=269756 - 2020-10-07
of reinstatement. ¶5 Because the OLR has requested that we not impose the costs of this proceeding on Attorney
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=269756 - 2020-10-07